(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "State of Maryland uniform crime reports"

OF MO coil FOE 



w 



iiiiii'iniTr'iin' ,.^ -^^ 

3 m3D D523mbM 3 Qpiv. of MaP/land 1^065 

,)UL 1 8 7006 

:RIME in MAR\fif^© 




2005 UNIFORM CRIME REPORT 



GOVERNOR ROBERT L. EHRLICH, JR. 



LT. GOVERNOR MICHAEL S. STEELE 



COLONEL THOMAS E. HUTCHINS, SUPERINTENDENT 



MARYLAND STATE POLICE 



CENTRAL RECORDS DIVISION 

IDA J. WILLIAMS, DIVISION DIRECTOR 



UNIFORM 

CRIME 

REPORTING 

PROGRAM 

JOHN VESPA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 
DENISE VIDI SCHERER, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 




STATf or MARYl AMI) I'^jS^^ 

MARYLAND STATE POLICE I 'f' 

1201 REISTERSTOWN ROAD / 

PIKESVILLE, MARYLAND 21208-3899 V' 

410-4863101 ^-:^t^^-> 
ROBERT L. EHRLICH JR. TOLL FREE: 1-800-525-5555 

GOvtRNOH jQQ. 410-486-0677 THOMAS E. "TIM" HUTChinS 

'.yi.M i,-.i< 
MICHAEL S. STEELE 

LT. GOVERNOR 

June 6, 2006 



The Honorable Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. 
Governor 
State House 
Annapolis MD 21401 

Dear Governor Ehrlich: 

In accordance with Public Safety Article 2, Subsection 307 and 308, of the 
Annotated Code of Maryland , the Maryland State Police is pleased to submit the 2005 
Uniform Crime Report, Crime in Maryland . This publication represents the 31** annual 
report. 

Maryland law enforcement agencies contribute crime data to the Maryland 
Uniform Crime Reporting Program. The crime data, submitted monthly to the Central 
Records Division, is carefully validated, and every effort is made to authenticate the 
accuracy and completeness of the reported data. 

The 2005 Crime in Maryland publication provides valuable information to law 
enforcement personnel, members of State government and interested parties, including; 
academic, civic and research organizations. The information is beneficial in the assessment 
of crime patterns and the development of effective strategies to combat criminal acts. 

These crime statistics could not have been accurately compiled without the 
dedication and cooperation of all police agencies, sheriff offices and other specialized police 
agencies throughout Maryland. The contributions of those agencies who provide statistical 
data to the Uniform Crime Reporting Program permit the Maryland State Police to 
develop a comprehensive picture of crime in Maryland. 

Sincerely, 

Thomas E. Hutchins 
Superintendent 

TEH:IJW:kj 



-Marylamrs Fincsr f)Q ^QT CIRCULATE 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/stateofnnarylandu2005stat 



Executive Summary 



An annual release since 1975, Crime In Maryland pertains to 
crime statistics. This publication details crime (State, County, 
Municipality and by reporting agency) , clearance rates, arrests, law 
enforcement officers killed or assaulted and law enforcement 
employee data. The statewide Uniform Crime Reporting Program was 
initiated to report crime in Maryland to the National UCR program 
administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Maryland 
program has since increased its data collection with domestic 
violence, hate bias reporting and carjacking statistics. Carjacking 
and hate bias incident statistics are released in separate 
publications to facilitate detailed reporting. 

The Uniform Crime Reporting Program collects information on 
crimes that were selected as an index to represent crime in the 
United States. These index crimes are murder, rape, robbery, 
aggravated assault, breaking or entering, larceny-theft and motor 
vehicle theft. Although not an indexed crime, the crime of arson is 
also collected. 

There were 237,843 total crime incidents reported in 2005 
representing a 1 percent decrease when compared to 2004 crime 
totals. Violent crime consisting of murder, rape, robbery and 
aggravated assault increased 1 percent. The property crimes of 
breaking or entering, larceny-theft and motor vehicle theft 
experienced a 2 percent decrease. The index crime breakdown is as 
follows : 



Murder 


6, 


.0% 


Breaking or Entering 


- 2, 


.0% 


Rape 


- 3, 


.8% 


Larceny-Theft 


- 1. 


.0% 


Robbery 


12 


.7% 


Motor Vehicle Theft 


- 5, 


.0% 


Aggravated Assault 


- 4 


.8% 


Arson 


1, 


.5% 



Total arrests for 2005 were 308,075 representing a 1 percent 
decrease when compared to the total arrests for 2004. Of the total 
arrests 257,761 were adults, an increase of less than 1 percent 
while 50,314 were juvenile arrests a decrease of 4 percent. Of the 
total arrests there were 53,047 persons arrested for drug abuse 
violations, an increase of 2 percent. There were 23,538 persons 
arrested for driving while intoxicated, a decrease of less than 1 
percent . 

One law enforcement officers died in the line of duty during 
2005. There were 4,166 officers assaulted which reflected an 
increase of 8 percent. This assault figure represents 28 percent of 
full time law enforcement officers employed. 

In 2005, there were 14,932 full time law enforcement officers 
employed which represents a less than 1 percent increase. There 
were 2.7 full time law enforcement officers per 1,000 population. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



Introduction 1 

Crime Factors 7 

Crime Index Offenses 9 

Murder 13 

Rape 2 3 

Robbery 2 7 

Aggravated Assault 31 

Breaking or Entering ' 3 5 

Larceny-Theft 3 9 

Motor Vehicle Theft 43 

Arson 4 7 

Domestic Violence 51 

Index Offense Data 65 

Maryland UCR Crime Index Report by Region, County & Agency 66 

Municipality Crime Rate 103 

Maryland Arrest Data 113 

Drug Arrest County Chart 117 

Arrests - Sex & Race 123 

Arrests - Age 124 

Maryland Arrest Report by Region, County & Agency 12 6 

Law Enforcement Officers Killed & Assaulted 199 

Law Enforcement Officers Killed 201 

Law Enforcement Officers Assaulted 203 

Law Enforcement Officers Assaulted by Region, 

County Sc Agency 205 

Law Enforcement Employee Data • 217 

Law Enforcement Employee Rates 219 

Law Enforcement Employee Data by Region, County & Agency.. 220 
Ten Year Crime Index Chart 227 



Note: The 2005 Annual Motor Vehicle Robbery ( "Car j acking" ) Report 
is a separate publication. 



INTRODUCTION 



BACKGROUND 

The Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program is one measure that 
has been taken in the establishment of an effective Criminal Justice 
Information System (CJIS) for the State. This particular phase focuses 
on the incidence of crime and law enforcement. It establishes a method 
to collect, evaluate and process uniform statistical data on crime 
statewide. The Maryland UCR Program provides the means to forward more 
valid data to the Federal Bureau of Investigation from a single agency 
and also to consolidate it into an annual report entitled Crime in 
Maryland . 



NATIONAL UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM 

The counterpart of the Maryland UCR Program is the National UCR Program 
which is under the direction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 
The National Program resulted from a need for a uniform compilation of 
crime statistics nationwide. Uniform Crime Reports were first 
collected in 1930 after being developed by a committee of the 
International Association of Chiefs of Police. The lACP continues to 
serve in an advisory capacity to' the FBI in the current operation of 
the Program. 

Crime statistics voluntarily submitted by individual law enforcement 
agencies from all fifty states are presented annually in the FBI's 
publication entitled Crime in the United States . 



MARYLAND UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM 

The FBI has actively assisted individual states in the development of 
State UCR Programs compatible with the National Program, Maryland took 
advantage of this assistance in 1972 and was able to develop its own 
program by 197 5 . 

The Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program became operational January 
1, 1975. This program consists of the uniform classification, review, 
compilation and analysis of crime statistics reported .by all law 
enforcement agencies of the State pursuant to the guidelines and 
regulations prescribed by law. 

The responsibility and authority for the collection and dissemination 
of UCR data is assigned to the Department of State Police in accordance 
with Public Safety Article 2, subsection 307 and 308 of the Annotated 
Code of Maryland. 



PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES 

In keeping with the recommendation of the President ' s Commission on Law 
Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, the Maryland' UCR Program 
was planned for eventual growth into a complete and integrated offender 
based Criminal Justice Information System. Under this program, each 
offender arrested in Maryland is tracked through the entire criminal 
justice system from time of arrest, through the courts, to the 
correctional system where their exit (parole, expiration of sentence, 
etc.) will be recorded. In this manner, a complete "criminal history" 
on individual offenders will be available for use by the police, courts 
and correctional agencies in Maryland. In addition, statistical data 
derived from the CJIS Program will provide assistance in determining 
the overall efficiency of the Criminal Justice System in Maryland and 
will make effective management studies possible. 

The fundamental objectives of the Maryland UCR Program are: 

1. Inform the Governor, legislature, other 
governmental officials and the public as to the 
nature, magnitude and trends of the crime problem 
in Maryland. 

2. Provide law enforcement administrators with 
criminal statistics for administrative and 
operational use. 

3. Determine who commits crimes by age, sex, race and 
other attributes in order to find the proper focus 
for crime prevention and enforcement. 

4. Provide base data and statistics to measure the 
workload and effectiveness of Maryland's Criminal 
Justice System. 

5. Provide base data and statistics to measure the 
effects of prevention and deterrence programs. 

6. Provide base data and statistics for research to 
improve the efficiency, effectiveness and 
performance of criminal justice agencies. 

7. Provide base data to assist in the assessment of 
social and other causes of crime for the 
development of theories of criminal behavior. 

8. Provide the FBI with complete UCR data to' be 
included in the national crime reports. 



RKPORTINC PROCEDURES 

Under the Maryland UCR Program, law enforcement agencies submit 
specified Uniform Crime Reports. The necessary information for each 
of the required reports is gathered from each agencies record of 
complaints, investigations and arrests. 

Crime data and information is submitted by state, county and municipal 
law enforcement agencies monthly on the number of offenses known to 
them in the following crime categories: 

(1) Criminal Homicide 

(2) Forcible Rape 

(3) Robbery 

(4) Assault 

(5) Breaking or Entering 

(6) Larceny-theft 

(7) Motor Vehicle Theft 

(8) Arson* 

The count of offenses is taken from the record of complaints received 
by law enforcement agencies. This information comes from victims, 
witnesses, other sources or discovered by law enforcement during their 
own operation. Complaints determined by subsequent investigation to 
be unfounded are eliminated from count. The resulting number of 
"actual offenses known to law enforcement agencies" in these crime 
categories are reported without regard for whether anyone is arrested, 
stolen property is recovered, local prosecutive policy or any other 
consideration . 

Reported offenses are recorded by the municipality and county in which 
they occur. Municipal law enforcement agencies report those crimes 
which occur within the cities and state. County agencies report those 
crimes which occur in the counties outside the cities. 

A supplemental report is also submitted each month showing the value 
of stolen and recovered property, the type of property and the type 
of offense within a crime category in which it was taken. This report 
also shows the number of stolen vehicles recovered locally and by 
other jurisdictions. In addition, each agency reports the number of 
persons arrested by them or other agencies for crimes which have 
occurred within their jurisdiction. The arrest report also shows the 
age, sex and race of those arrested and the disposition of juveniles 
by the arresting agency. When applicable, supplemental reports are 
submitted regarding the persons, weapons and circumstances, etc., 
involved in homicides, domestic violence incidents, officer assaults 
and "carjackings". In addition, police employee data is collected on 
an annual basis. 



♦Monthly arson reports are submitted for law enforcement agencies by the State 
Fire Marshal's Office and designated county agencies. 



VERIFICATION PROCESS 

A major concern in the collection of crime statistics for law 
enforcement agencies throughout the state is the uniformity and 
accuracy of data received. Program aides such as guides and 
instructional classes do not necessarily guarantee the accuracy of the 
reports submitted by the contributors, therefore, additional controls 
are necessary. 

Each report received by the UCR section is recorded, examined and 
verified for mathematical accuracy and possibly more important for 
reasonableness. The verification process includes numerous checks to 
ensure the validity of information. The elimination of duplicate 
reporting by individual contributors receives particular attention. 
Minor errors are corrected by telephone contact with the contributors. 
Substantial variations and errors are adjusted through personal 
contacts. The personal contacts are invaluable to the accuracy and 
quality of reporting. Field Records Representatives are engaged in 
a constant educational effort and as such, provide a vital link 
between the UCR Program and the contributor. 



POPULATION DATA 

The computation of crime rates as they appear in this report by 
municipality, county and state are based on the latest available 
population estimates for the year. These population estimates are 
provided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation through the 
cooperation and assistance of the United States Bureau of Census. 



LIMITATIONS OF A UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM 

Information currently collected by the Maryland Program is generally 
the same as that gathered by the National System and the methods of 
classifying and scoring offenses and arrests are the same. This 
readily enables comparisons with other states and with the nation, as 
a whole. However, there are limitations to the information collected 
which should be clearly understood before any conclusions are drawn 
from the UCR data presented in this report. 

The main goal of the UCR Program is to furnish police administrators 
with a measure of their activities and operational problems as 
indicated by the number of reported offenses, arrests, clearances, 
etc . 

A first step in the control of crime is to ascertain the true 
dimensions of the problem. However, present statistics as gathered 
by the UCR Program measure neither the real incidence of crime or the 
full amount of economic loss to victims. Information regarding number 
of offenses, clearances, value and type of property stolen and 
recovered property are collected only for the eight Part I offenses. 
For Part II offenses the only information submitted is the number of 
arrests for these crimes. Consequently, there is no record of the 



actual number of these offenses occurring, or is there a calculation 
made for property loss. 

The Crime Index does not explicitly take into account the varying 
degrees of seriousness of its seven components (excluding arson) , 
Each crime receives the same weight as it is added to the index, 
consequently, an auto theft is counted the same as a murder and an 
aggravated assault is weighed equally with an attempted breaking or 
entering. Any review of crime must consider the volume, rate and 
trend of each offense that comprises the index and the relationship 
between these seven crimes*. 

The Maryland and National Uniform Crime Reporting Programs are 
designed to measure offenses committed and persons arrested. 
Difficulties can arise if this distinction is not kept clearly in 
mind. Crimes relate to events, arrests relate to persons. Unlike 
traffic violations where there is usually one event, violation and 
offender, a single criminal act can involve several crimes, offenders 
and victims. Relating specific crimes to a criminal or offense to 
evaluate characteristics of those arrested, is generally beyond the 
scope of the present Uniform Crime Reporting System. 

Juvenile crime and arrest statistics, because of their nature, are 
another area of misunderstanding. Many juvenile offenders are handled 
informally, as a consequence, inaccurate or incomplete recording of 
the event or action may result. Procedures for handling juveniles 
vary between departments more so than the handling of adult offenders. 
Furthermore, the degree of juvenile involvement in cleared offenses 
is probably seriously misunderstood because the juvenile clearance 
indicator is recorded only when juveniles are exclusively involved. 
When both adults and juveniles are subjects in a clearance, the 
juvenile participation is not reported. 

The preceding comments should not be viewed as an indictment of the 
Uniform Crime Reporting Program which, admittedly, is designed for the 
operational requirements of law enforcement agencies. While the 
current method of gathering and reporting crime and arrest data 
provide a less than complete picture of criminality in our society, 
the FBI has designed the National Incident Based Reporting System to 
address these limitations. 



'Arson is not used at this time in computing the Crime Index. 



CRIME FACTORS 



statistics compiled under the Uniform Crime Reporting Program from 
data submitted by Maryland law enforcement agencies projects a 
statewide view of crime. Awareness of the presence of certain crime 
factors which may influence the resulting volume and type of 
statistics presented is necessary if fair and equitable conclusions 
are to be drawn. These crime influencing factors are present to some 
degree in every community. Their presence affects in varying degrees 
the crime experience of that community. Attempts at comparison of 
crime figures between communities should not be made without first 
considering the individual factors present in each community. 

Crime, as an outgrowth of society, remains a social problem of grave 
concern. The police are limited in their role to its suppression and 
detection. As stated by the President's Commission on Law 
Enforcement and Administration of Criminal Justice in their report 
"The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society" (1967 - Page 92) : 

"But the fact that the police deal daily with crime does 
not mean that they have unlimited power to prevent it, or 
reduce it, or deter it. The police did not create and 
cannot resolve the social conditions that stimulate 
crime. They did not start and cannot stop the convulsive 
social changes that are taking place in America. They do 
not enact the laws that they are required to enforce, nor 
do they dispose of the criminals they arrest. The police 
are only one part of the criminal justice system; the 
criminal justice system is only one part of the 
government; and the government is only one part of 
society. In so far as crime is a social phenomenon, 
crime prevention is the responsibility of every part of 
society. The criminal process is limited to case by case 
operations,' one criminal or one crime at a time." 

Listed below are some of the conditions which affect the type and 
volume of crime that occurs from place to place: 

Density and size of the community population 
and the metropolitan area of which it is a 
part . 

Composition of the population with particular 
reference to age, sex and race. 

Economic status of the population. 



Relative stability of the population including 
number and ratio of seasonal visitors/ 
residents, commuters and other transients. 

Climate and seasonal weather conditions. 

Educational, recreational and religious 
characteristics. 

Standards governing appointments to the police 
force . 

Policies of the prosecuting officials and the 
courts . 

Attitude of the public toward law enforcement 
problems . 

The administrative and investigative efficiency 
of the local law enforcement agency, including 
the degree of adherence to crime reporting 
standards . 

Organization and cooperation of adjoining and 
overlapping police jurisdictions. 



CRIME INDEX OFFENSES 

The crime counts listed in this publication are actual offenses 
established by police investigation. When police receive a complaint 
of a crime and the follow-up investigation discloses no crime 
occurred, it is "unfounded". In 2005, police investigations that were 
"unfounded" represented 3 percent of the complaints concerning index 
offenses. When comparing individual index offenses to the number 
reported, "unfounded" offenses ranged from less than 1 percent in the 
aggravated assault category to 22 percent in the rape category. In 
2004, there was less than 1 percent "unfounded" in the aggravated 
assault category and 19 percent in the rape category. 

A total of 237,843 actual Index Offenses were reported to law 
enforcement agencies in Maryland during the calendar year 2005. This 
represents a decrease of 1 percent when compared to the 2004 total of 
241,263 Crime Index Offenses. 

An analysis of Index Offenses by month in 2005 shows that August had 
the highest frequency of occurrence and February had the lowest, the 
same as in 2004. 

The Crime Index Offenses represent the most common problem to law 
enforcement. They are serious crimes by their nature, volume, or 
frequency of occurrence. They are categorized as Violent Crimes, 
which includes Murder, Forcible Rape, Robbery and Aggravated Assault, 
or as Property Crimes which includes Breaking or Entering, Larceny- 
Theft and Motor Vehicle Theft. 

VIOLENT CRIME 

violent Crimes involve the element of personal confrontation between 
the perpetrator and the victim; consequently, they are considered more 
serious than Property Crimes because of their very nature. These 
offenses accounted for 17 percent of the total Crime Index for 2005. 
In 2004 violent Crimes made up 16 percent of the Crime Index Total. 
Violent Crime increased 1 percent compared to 2004. 

Analyzing the Violent Crimes by month reveals July had the greatest 
frequency of occurrence, while February had the lowest. In 2004 May 
had the greatest frequency of occurrence, while February had the 
lowest . 

PROPERTY CRIMES 

The number of Property Crimes reported during 2005, was more than 5 
times greater than the number of Violent Crimes reported. As a group, 
Property Crimes made up 83 percent of the total Crime Index in 2005. 
In 2004 Property Crimes made up 84 percent of the Crime Index Total. 
Property Crime decreased 2 percent compared to 2004. A monthly 
analysis showed August had the highest frequency of occurrence and 
February the lowest, the same as in 2004. 



RATES 

Crime Rates relate the incidence of crime to the resident population. 
Many other factors which may contribute to the volume and type of 
crime in a given jurisdiction are not incorporated here, but are shown 
in the section entitled "Crime Factors". 

In 2005, the Crime Rate for Maryland was 4,246.9 victims for every 
100,000 population. This represents a 2 percent decrease in the Crime 
Rate when compared to the 2004 rate of 4,340.8. 

The 2005 Crime Rate for the Violent Crime group was 703.0 victims per 
100,000 inhabitants, a less than 1 percent increase compared with the 
2004 rate of 700.6. The Property Crime group had a rate of 3,543.9 
victims, a 3 percent decrease when compared to the 2004 rate of 
3, 640.2 . 



CLEARANCES 

For Uniform Crime Reporting purposes, a crime is cleared when police 
have identified the offender, have evidence to charge him and actually 
take him into custody. Solutions of crimes are also recorded in 
exceptional instances where some element beyond police control 
precludes formal charges against the offender, such as the victim's 
refusal to prosecute or local prosecution is declined because the 
subject is being prosecuted elsewhere for a crime committed in another 
jurisdiction. The arrest of one person can clear several crimes or 
several persons may be arrested in the process of solving one crime. 

Maryland Law Enforcement Agencies cleared 23 percent of all Index 
Offenses reported to them in 2005. In 2004, 22 percent of all Index 
Offenses reported were cleared. 

The Violent Crimes recorded a 50 percent clearance rate in 2005, the 
same as in 2004. The Property Crime group experienced an 18 percent 
clearance rate in 2005 compared to 17 percent in 2004. 

Considered individually the 2005 Violent Crime clearance rate was 
determined to be 60 percent of the Murders, 55 percent of the Rapes, 
26 percent of the Robberies and 64 percent of the Aggravated Assaults. 
The Property Crime clearance rates were 17 percent for Breaking or 
Entering, 20 percent for Larceny-Theft and 11 percent for Motor 
Vehicle Theft. 

The relatively high clearance rate for Violent Crimes as compared to 
Non-Violent Property Crimes is in part attributable to the volume 
difference between the two. Property Crime volume is much greater 
than that of Violent Crime and police investigation of Violent Crime 
is usually more intense. While the element of direct contact between 
the victim and perpetrator, as well as witness identification also 
contributes to this higher rate of solution for Violent Crime, stealth 
is involved to a greater degree in the Property Crime. 



10 



JUVENILE ( LEARANC ES 

A juvenile clearance is the clearance of an offense in which all of 
the offenders involved were under the age of 18. If even one of the 
offenders was over 17 years of age, the clearance of that offense is 
not considered a juvenile clearance. In 2005, such juvenile 
clearances represented 20 percent of all clearances, the same as in 
2004 . 

Juvenile clearances in the Violent Crime category represented 16 
percent of the total cleared in both 2004 and 2005. The clearances in 
Violent Crimes are: Homicide 6 percent. Rape 8 percent. Robbery 21 

percent and Aggravated Assault 16 percent. 

In the Property Crime category, clearances involving Juvenile 
offenders represented 23 percent of the total cases cleared in 2005, 
compared to 23 percent in 2004. The clearances in Property crimes 
are: Burglary 23 percent, Larceny-Theft 22 percent and Motor Vehicle 
Theft 29 percent. 



STOLEN PROPERTY VALUE 

The total value of Property Stolen during 2005 was $376,738,048 
which represents an 8 percent increase from 2004. Recovered Property 
amounted to $187,091,041 which is 50 percent of the total stolen, 
resulting in a $189,647,007 property loss to victims in the State of 
Maryland during 2005. This property loss represents an increase of 
1 percent when compared to the property loss in 2004. 

5 YEAR TREND 



5 YEAR 
AVERAGE 


2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


Stolen 360 
Recovered 164 


377 
187 


349 
162 


383 
162 


357 

164 


336 
144 



Value in Millions 



11 



MURDER 



MURDER 



Murder and non-negligent manslaughter is the willful (non-negligent) 
killing of one human being by another. 

VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, a total of 552 murders were reported, this represents 
a 6 percent increase over 2004. Murder accounted for 1.4 percent of 
all violent crime and .2 percent of the crime index. In 2005, there 
were 9.9 murders per 100,000 population. 

ANALYSIS OF MURDER 

In 2005, 330 murders were cleared with 6 percent of these clearances 
involving only juvenile offenders. A total of 333 persons were 
arrested for murder during 2005. A breakdown of persons arrested 
for murder was 93 percent male, 7 percent female, 10 percent 
juvenile, 82 percent black, 16 percent white and 2 percent 
consisting of American Indian and Asian. 

During 2005, 280 of the murder victims were in the 18 to 29 age 
group representing 51 percent of the total. 

Handguns were used in 72 percent of the reported murders in 2005. 
This represents a 9 percent increase in their use when compared to 
the handgun use in 2004. 

The next most used weapon was a knife accounting for 12 percent of 
the reported murders in 2005. This represents a 14 percent increase 
when compared to 2004. 

Drug related murders accounted for 2 percent of the total, as 
compared to 1 percent in 2004. 

Family members as offenders in murder accounted for 7 percent while 
boyfriend or girlfriend (those not cohabitating) reflects less than 
1 percent of the total reported. There was a 30 percent decrease in 
family related murders while boyfriend or girlfriend murders 
decreased 40 percent. Additionally, an acquaintance is listed in 
13 percent of the murders reported in 2005. Strangers and unknown 
relationships accounted for two other large categories, 17 percent 
and 81 percent respectively. 

In 52 percent of the murders, the offenders are unknown and not 
described. When the race of the victim and offender is known the 
offender is most often someone of the same race. 



14 



VICTIM, l)i:S( RIBKI) OI I km)i:r 
RACK KKLATIONS 



VICTIM 


TOTAL 


DESCRIBED 


SAME RACE 


PERCENT 




MURDERS 


OFFENDER 


OFFENDER 


DISTRIBUTION 


White 


11-1 


72 


2 8 


39% 


Black 


424 


179 


113 


63% 


Asian 


9 


9 


3 


33% 


American 
Indian 


1 


1 





N/A 


Unknown 


4 








N/A 



MURDER 

Total Number of Murders 



700 -T 








n 






JT -Tl 




"1 


n n n 


400- 


- - 


-■•-■■- jljT - - 


„ 




300- 

200- 

100- 

0- 


nn 






--■■-•--- 




-■----■ - 


'\' 'V V 'i' 'i' 'V 'i' V 'i' 'i' 'i' 'i' V 'i' r V v 





MURDER RATE 

Murder Rate per 100,000 Population 







•lo n 




n 


10.0- 
8.0- 
6.0- 
4.0- 
2.0- 
0.0- 


"ir 


] ' WW\ 


|w - - - Hm — 


._......__ 


■ - - - - - - - - - . 






- - - - - 


1 1 ! i 1 1 1 1 I [ I I I 1 I V* 





1975 



1985 



1995 



2000 



2005 



15 



Murder by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


1 





1 





1 


1 


Anne Anmdel 


16 


16 


24 


17 


11 


17 


Baltimore 


40 


29 


31 


29 


31 


32 


Baltimore City 


269 


276 


270 


253 


256 


265 


Calvert 


2 


1 


3 





1 


1 


Caroline 


1 








3 





1 


Carroll 


2 





2 


5 





2 


Cecil 


4 


2 


4 


1 





2 


Charles 


4 


5 


4 


6 


9 


6 


Dorchester 





3 


2 


4 


2 


2 


Frederick 


1 


1 


5 


5 


1 


3 


Garrett 





1 








1 





Harford 


2 


3 


5 


5 


2 


3 


Howard 


4 


1 


7 


7 


5 


5 


Kent 


1 

















Montgomery 


21 


18 


23 


32 


19 


23 


Prince George's 


164 


146 


• 135 


141 


109 


139 


Queen Anne's 


1 


1 








2 


1 


St. Mary's 


1 


3 


1 


3 


4 


2 


Somerset 


1 


1 


2 


2 





1 


Talbot 


3 


1 


2 


1 





1 


Washington 


4 


5 


1 


6 


3 


4 


Wicomico 


4 


5 


1 


5 


3 


4 


Worcester 


2 








2 


2 


1 


*Statewide Agencies 


4 


3 


2 


1 


1 


2 


State Total 


552 


521 


525 


528 


463 


518 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occuirence. 



16 



i^ 



o o 
o o 



KD T KO 









o o 



O o <-< 



z 2 
§3 






g r; 






< [1. 



?!§- 



H f^ o 

s - - 



rH [^ rH O 



-.^ 



- SS- 



►J .-I 
< • 

O -H 



< o ^ n 



y> ,-) ,-1 

r-i o o 

o o o 



W ID CM in o 

H rH ^C ■O' CO 

g . o ^ ^ 



o o 
o o 






cu ex 0^ cu 



17 



O -"-.-^ 

M rH ,-1 
MOO 

S rH CM 



322 



g :^ 



;° 



.HO rn O O O 

o o o o o o 



< H ^ O 



S H 



U. D Ci< 



o o 



o o 
o o 



o o n 

O O rH 



^ o o 



S ;^ 



18 



o 2 
.V o 



O O rH O 

O O O O 



O O 

o o 



l/l o 

O rH 



:^ o o 

o --.^ 

C/1 rH tH 
MOO 



b. < 

O D 

H 

3t U 

< 



r-l in CT. 



s: M tN 

o • • 
U 0< Q. 



O O M rH 



o u 

[I. 

0. u, 



3^ 

« > 



§H 



S 3 



en I- 



O MO r-. fH 

O O O O o 



o o 
o o 



3 

D 
*. # O 



MM MO 






S s 



o o 
o o 



o o 
o o 



o o 
o o 



o o o o 



a, Qj Oi cu 



a< o « 

K O « 



3J^ : 



3 

a 

i S 

8 S 



19 



O O UD O 



O < O < 

o 2 o 2 



o o o 2 o 



o o o o 



o o o o o o 
o o o o o o 



gg 



o o o o o o 
o o o o o o 






o o 
o o 



o o o o o o 
o o o o o o 



< ooooooo 

p ooooooo 



o o o o 
o o o o 



MOO 

Oi 

S H M 



sg :; 



oo^oooooo 



oooooooo 
oooooooo 



OOOOOOrtOrH W 



o o o o o 



o o o o o o 



H H H 

hO tloovorio 



O O O O O 
O O O O O 



OOOOOOOO 



OO.HOOOOOOOOO 



:^§ 



o _o o o o o 



< td < W < 



I s u < s 

W W J w w 

I J J 2 

D< a. 3 

ww:«;:«i2Z>-i -Mt-iao 

HHUU2<CHHHE-U2 

i3:Jj(/]cnppppf-i2 
32cQtn<<sssSo5 



J J J X :«i (/) M 
J § J i J S < 

gu,gli<fDuJ0QJJ 

xiJJcDcnPpppH 
3saiiB<<£ssSo 



td U M M n X 

J J J I :«; 01 w 

a, ou a, s w 

X3:JJcnc/)ppppH2W 
33mcQ<<£sg£o5h' 



2 

u 

I. 

o 

w 3 



S 3 



oooooooooooo 
oooooooooooo 



oooooooooooo 
ooooooLOooooin 



31 



<ooooooooooo 

200000000000 



oooooooooooo 
oooooooooooo 



o ^ 



H "^ W 



ooooo<ooooo 

00000200000 



ooooooooo 



H p 



CNOOOOOMOOOOrH U 



0000000000.-I 



o o o o o 



:^8 



ooooooooo 
ooooooooo 



Ofioooonoooo 
omoooornoooo 






o o o o 
o o o o 



o o 
o o 



s§ 



rH O O O O 



a§ 



OrHOOOOWOOOOiH 



CNOOOOOOOOOOO 



J J J a: ;«: 05 i-H 

J § J g J s < 

<U<W<WCilJwW 
£U.£DL,SU.JmJJ 

E-i H U U 

s3ajoQ<<£s£So5 



W 2 Q 

t- 3 u 

W U W t-H 1-1 X 

J J J a: ^«: o) >-i 

U<W<tiJ<3U<5: 
O £ ►J S J £ < 

2[i.gu.Stx.J01^JJ 2 

a< a, Q- 3 

uwiiiid2Zi-i -Mi-iaJO 

xa:JJo505ppppE-z 

23DQBJ<<S£lfeo5 



J ►J a vc y. w ^ 

gu.g[i.gu.JcQJJ 



w u be; i<: 2 2 

H H U U g g 

I K 3 3 o) o) 

3 3 CQ CD < < 



CU Q. 

H H U 

J J ac 






20 



ooooooo<oooo 
000000020000 



0000000i<0000 
OOOOOOOZOOOO 



000000000000 
00000000 0000 



0000000 
0000000 






0000000000 
0000000000 



000000000000 
000000000000 



^ in 
Zoo 
O ^-^ 



0000000 



0000 



0000000 



0000 



0000000000 



H8 



J H * <*> .V rt» 

O 



000000000000 
000000000000 



000000000000 
000000000000 



000000000000 
000000000000 






0000 



0000000000 



000000000000 



O 
Q- Q 



U 2D 

H 3 W 

W W W M n X 

J J J I it: cn I-. 
a cu a. 

WM^^22>H -h-ina: 
HHUUl2<HHHHCd 

32mcD<<SSSSO 



lg 



Id M w 1-1 HH X 

►J ►q J I bi: CO 1-1 
ww^;«;z2i-i -i-iwao 

HHUUi<<HHHHU2 

i-.M<<Mi-ijjjji2 
33a3cD<<sssso5 



J 



5 |-S 



u z a 

U w [d M MX 

J J J a: 41: CO I-. 

gu<g[i.g[i4jCQJJ Z- 

a. a. o. s w 
uw:«i4rizZ'-i •i-Hi-.a:ow 
f-t-uu33HHf-E-[dz52 

W«rf<^HhHjJJJl22 

SKJjcocnpDppHZ'^ 

S3mtn<<£5:ffoD?- 



O 2 Ci3 

i i g 



< o o 
200 



o < o o 
0200 



o o 
o o 



(too 
200 



^<ooo<oooo< 
M2000200002 



o o 

o o 



O wnOkOOUJOOVCO 



o o < o < o 
002020 



000000 



J H * ■* 



CD m C> \£> Ct 



O O O O O M 

E-i 

000000 



§ n 



0000000 



< M O O O O' 



o o 
o o 



< H O O 



0000000 



0000000 



00000 
00000 



OOO^r-IOOO 



H H o 



W 1-1 1-1 



Cd 


^ 


,1 


^ 


w 


^ 


s 


g 




1 




1 


Dl, 


R' 


Cd 


w 


i.i 


ir: 


5? 


H 


i 


i 


CO m 


S 


s 


i 



iig 



SB 



3 U < S 



J J J J 



ig 



SI 



3 i sg s I 

< u < u < u 

Z tt. S U. £ &< 

w u :«: ii: 2 2 

H E-i U U 9 3 

I I 3 J u) en 



u < £ 

3 Cd « 

CD J J Z 

a. Q. 3 

■ ^ - Hi o 

S S S S § 



S § i - 



21 



RAPE 



RAPE 



Forcible rape is defined as the carnal knowledge of a female 
forcibly and against her will. 



VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, 1,266 actual forcible rapes were reported, this 
represents a 4 percent decrease over 2004. Rape accounted for 3 
percent of the violent crime and .5 percent of the crime index. In 
2005, there were 22.6 forcible rapes per 100,000 population. 



ANALYSIS OF RAPE 

Rape by force accounted for 88 percent of all forcible rapes and 
12 percent were attempt to rape. 

In 2005, 692 forcible rapes were cleared with 8 percent of these 
clearances involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 418 persons were arrested for forcible rape during 2005. 
A breakdown of persons arrested for forcible rape was, 13 percent 
juvenile, 55 percent black and 44 percent white and 1 percent 
consisting of American Indian and Asian. 



5 YEAR TREND 





OFFENSES & CRIME RATE* 








5 Year 














Average 


2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


Force 


1, 181 


1, 118 


1, 141 


1, 185 


1, 193 


1,270 


Attempt 


170 


148 


175 


173 


171 


183 


Total 


1,351 


1,266 


1,316 


1,358 


1,364 


1,453 


Crime rate 


25 


23 


24 


25 


25 


27 



*Rapes per 100,000 population 



24 



RAPE 

Total Number of Rapes 



2,500 



2,000 



1,500 



500 



i I I I 1 I n^ 1 1 \ I 1 I \ \ \ I ! \ I r-^ 

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 



Rape Rate per 100,000 Population 




n n r 


on rv - : 


m 




' n n n 






0.0 ■ 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 



1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 



2005 



25 



Rape by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


30 


23 


22 


26 


22 


25 


Anne Arundel 


88 


110 


93 


94 


119 


101 


Baltimore 


178 


198 


210 


236 


237 


212 


Baltimore City 


162 


182 


208 


179 


299 


206 


Calvert 


15 


10 


9 


23 


17 


15 


Caroline 


7 


12 


9 


13 


14 


11 


Carroll 


29 


47 


42 


31 


33 


36 


Cecil 


11 


18 


16 


15 


20 


16 


Charles 


35 


32 


38 


41 


39 


37 


Dorchester 


9 


10 


12 


11 


8 


10 


Frederick 


30 


39 


42 


50 


49 


42 


Garrett 


4 





7 


2 


5 


4 


Harford 


30 


45 


46 


45 


31 


39 


Howard 


42 


40 


46 


38 


34 


40 


Kent 


4 


3 


7 


8 


7 


6 


Montgomery 


157 


149 


148 


145 


146 


149 


Prince George's 


305 


293 


287 


274 


255 


283 


Queen Anne's 


15 


5 


6 


7 


8 


8 


St. Mary's 


24 


12 


14 


16 


12 


16 


Somerset 


3 


9 


7 


12 


10 


8 


Talbot 


10 


9 


10 


8 


8 


9 


Washington 


18 


17 


23 


29 


28 


23 


Wicomico 


34 


32 


32 


42 


41 


36 


Worcester 


25 


21 


23 


18 


9 


19 


♦Statewide Agencies 


1 





1 


1 


2 


1 


II State Total 


1,266 


1,316 


1,358 


1,364 


1,453 


1,351 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify. county of occurrence. 



26 



ROBBERY 



Robbery is the taking or attempting to take anything of value from 
the care, custody, or control of a person or persons by force or 
threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear. 

VOLUME AND RATES 

During 2005, there were 14,378 robbery offenses reported, this 
represents a 13 percent increase over 2004. Robbery accounted for 
37 percent of the violent crime and 6 percent of the crime index. 
In 2005, there were 256.7 robberies per 100,000 population. 

ANALYSIS OF ROBBERY 

During 2005, 47 percent of the robberies were committed on the 
street, while only 1 percent were bank robberies. Of the total 
number of robberies committed, firearm accounted for 54 percent 
while robberies committed with no weapon accounted for 32 percent 
of the total . 

In 2005, 3,718 robberies were cleared with 21 percent of these 
clearances involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 3,583 persons were arrested for robbery during 2005. 
A breakdown of persons arrested for robbery was 92 percent male, 
8 percent female, 37 percent juvenile, 78 percent black, 21 percent 
white and less than 1 percent consisting of American Indian and 
Asian. 

DISTRIBUTION BY NATURE 



















Number of 


Percent 


of 




Total 


Classification 


Offenses 


Distribut 


ion 




Value 


Highway 


6,776 


47% 




$ 


6 


532,553 


Commercial House 


2,924 


20% 






8 


989,285 


Service Station 


448 


3% 








979, 947 


Convenience Store 


554 


4% 








347,812 


Residence 


2,325 


16% 






3 


685,273 


Bank 


208 


2% 






1 


035,193 


Miscellaneous 


1, 143 


8% 






1 


199,321 


Total 


14,378 


100% 




$ 


22 


769,384 



28 



ROBBERY 



Total Number of Robbery 




1—1 




ri 


10,000 - - ^ ____.---______ 





n --,_^_, . ^__^., ^_^_-^_^ ^_^_^_^_ 





1 I — r 

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 



Robbery Rate per 100,000 Population 



500.0 



400.0 



300.0 



200.0 



100.0 



0.0 




I I I 1 I 1 r 

1975 1980 1985 



1 I 1 1 1 1 1 ! I I 1 ! I I 

1990 1995 2000 2005 



29 



Robbery by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


15 


27 


31 


22 


29 


25 


Anne Arundel 


865 


767 


753 


754 


736 


775 


Baltimore 


1,769 


1,565 


1,611 


1,705 


1,728 


1,676 


Baltimore City 


3,935 


4,085 


4,364 


4,764 


5,762 


4,582 


Calvert 


26 


13 


16 


17 


24 


19 


Caroline 


17 


10 


10 


22 


25 


17 


Carroll 


36 


48 


39 


50 


52 


45 


Cecil 


79 


60 


54 


43 


45 


56 


Charles 


195 


159 


152 


186 


135 


165 


Dorchester 


43 


15 


23 


28 


22 


26 


Frederick 


148 


177 


118 


148 


134 


145 


Garrett 


1 


2 


1 


1 


4 


2 


Harford 


193 


214 


248 


237 


191 


217 


Howard 


263 


224 


225 


218 


199 


226 


Kent 


15 


8 


10 


16 


10 


12 


Montgomery 


1,109 


856 


1,076 


977 


895 


983 


Prince George's 


5,172 


4,100 


4,148 


4,056 


3,916 


4,278 


Queen Anne's 


15 


13 


15 


14 


8 


13 


St. Mary's 


45 


32 


38 


32 


12 


32 


Somerset 


28 


21 


18 


7 


12 


17 


Talbot 


27 


30 


10 


13 


19 


20 


Washington 


111 


88 


107 


111 


89 


101 


Wicomico 


211 


205 


172 


187 


166 


188 


Worcester 


59 


42 


63 


78 


37 


56 


*Statewide Agencies 


1 








1 


2 


1 


|| State Total 


14,378 


12,761 


13,302 


13,687 


14,252 


13,676 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 



30 



AGGRAVATED 
ASSAULT 



AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 



Aggravated assault' is an unlawful attack by one person upon another 
for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. 

VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, a total of 23,173 aggravated assaults were reported, 
this represents a 5 percent decrease over 2004. Aggravated 
assaults accounted for 59 percent of the violent crime category and 
10 percent of the crime index. In 2005, there were 413.8 
aggravated assaults per 100,000 population. 



There were 62,288 simple assaults reported in 2005 for a total of 
85,461 aggravated and simple assaults. 



ANALYSIS OF ASSAULT 

During 2005, 16 percent of the aggravated assaults were with 
firearms, 23 percent with a knife or cutting instrument, 38 percent 
with other weapon and 23 percent with personal weapons; hands, 
fist, feet, etc. 

In 2005, 14,774 aggravated assaults were cleared with 16 percent of 
these clearances involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 7,758 persons were arrested for aggravated assault 
during 2005. A breakdown of persons arrested for aggravated assault 
was 79 percent male, 21 percent female, 24 percent juvenile, 54 
percent black, 45 percent white and less than 1 percent consisting 
of American Indian and Asian. 

5 YEAR TREND 























5 Year 
















Average 


2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


Firearrr 




3, 533 


3, 627 


3,389 


3,352 


3, 744 


3, 553 


Knife 




5, 164 


5,415 


5,176 


4,931 


5,330 


4,970 


Other 




10, 525 


8, 701 


10,402 


10, 179 


11,465 


11, 876 


Hands, 


etc. 


5,690 


5,430 


5,372 


5,131 


6,170 


6,349 


Total 




24,912 


23,173 


24,339 


23,593 


26,709 


26,748 



32 



AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 



Total Number of Aggravated Assault 








n n n n n 






10,000- ------------- 

5,000- ---------------- 

' 1 I- 1 1 ! I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 


1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I 



1985 



2005 



Aggravated Assault Rate per 100,000 Population 



600 



500 



400 



300 



200 



100 



I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 
1980 1985 1990 1995 



1975 



2000 



33 



Aggravated Assault by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


214 


275 


208 


187 


268 


230 


Anne Arundel 


2.198 


2,403 


2,633 


2,742 


2,932 


2,582 


Baltimore 


3,663 


4,388 


4,356 


4,589 


4,576 


4,314 


Baltimore City 


6,943 


7,199 


6,385 


8,667 


8,520 


7,543 


Calvert 


188 


204 


292 


331 


291 


261 


Caroline 


130 


124 


126 


152 


123 


131 


Carroll 


333 


320 


321 


305 


268 


309 


Cecil 


380- 


351 


381 


357 


384 


371 


Charles 


525 


540 


579 


642 


592 


576 


Dorchester 


122 


109 


113 


169 


173 


137 


Frederick 


557 


656 


675 


691 


787 


673 


Garrett 


57 


52 


38 


41 


17 


41 


Harford 


620 


623 


657 


554 


453 


581 


Howard 


306 


344 


271 


210 


277 


282 


Kent 


69 


47 


61 


66 


43 


57 


Montgomery 


909 


1,037 


1,015 


950 


912 


965 


Prince George's 


3,856 


3,649 


3,439 


4,007 


3,974 


3,785 


Queen Anne's 


41 


59 


145 


160 


140 


109 


St. Mary's 


290 


261 


268 


325 


294 


288 


Somerset 


92 


104 


109 


97 


102 


101 


Talbot 


83 


99 


123 


65 


44 


83 


Washington 


388 


426 


360 


327 


399 


380 


Wicomico 


674 


550 


518 


558 


806 


621 


Worcester 


337 


338 


346 


379 


310 


342 


* Statewide Agencies 


198 


181 


174 


138 


63 


151 


State Total 


23,173 


24,339 


23,593 


26,709 


26,748 


24,912 



Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 



34 



BREAKING 

OR 
ENTERING 



BREAKING OR ENTERING 



Breaking or entering is defined as the unlawful entry of a struc- 
ture to commit a felony or a theft. 

VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, a total of 35,921 breaking or entering ' s were 
reported, this represents a 2 percent decrease over 2004. Breaking 
or entering accounted for 18 percent of the property crime category 
and 15 percent of the crime index. In 2005, there were 641.4 
breaking or entering offenses per 100,000 population. 

ANALYSIS OF BREAKING OR ENTERING 

During 2005, 67 percent of the breaking or entering offenses 
involved forcible entry, 23 percent were unlawful entry without 
force and 9 percent were recorded as attempted forcible entry. 
Residential offenses accounted for 67 percent of the total offenses 
while 33 percent were non residential. The average dollar value 
loss was $ 1,630. 

In 2005, 6,260 breaking or entering offenses were cleared with 23 
percent of these clearances involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 7,088 persons were arrested for breaking or entering 
during 2005. A breakdown of persons arrested for breaking or 
entering was 87 percent male, 13 percent female, 35 percent 
juvenile, 47 percent black, 52 percent white and 1 percent 
consisting of American Indian and Asian. 

PLACE AND TIME OF OCCURRENCE 



Classification 






Number of 

Offenses 


Percent 
Distribution 


Total Value 


Residence Total 






23,985 


67% 


$ 


40,075,537 


Night 6 P.M. -6 


A 


M. 


6, 045 


17% 




8,457, 663 


Day 6 A.M. -6 


P 


M. 


10,228 


29% 




16,619,066 


Unknown 






7,712 


21% 




14, 998,808 


Non Residence 






11,936 


33% 


$ 


18,479,055 


Night 6 P.M. -6 


A 


M. 


5,204 


15% 




7,339, 508 


Day 6 A.M. -6 


P 


.M. 


1,966 


5% 




4,187,846 


Unknown 






4, 766 


13% 




6, 951, 701 


Grand Total 






35,921 


100% 


$ 


58,554,592 



36 



BREAKING OR ENTERING 



Total Number of Breaking or Enterings 












n n n 




n f" 


30,000- ---------- - 

20,000- -------------- 




'l|l 1 M 1 Li-L^J J LI. 1,1 


' 1 1 1 1 i 1 I I r V V V r 1 ■r'-V- 



1975 1980 



Breaking or Entering Rate per 100,000 Population 



2,000.0 



1,500.0 



1,000.0 



500.0 



0.0 



1975 1980 1985 



\ \ I I 1 I I I I i 1 r 

1995 2000 2005 



37 



Breaking or Entering by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


460 


488 


555 


487 


426 


483 


Anne Arundel 


3,122 


2,986 


3,107 


3,191 


3,206 


3,122 


Baltimore 


4,629 


4,942 


5,425 


5,719 


6,246 


5,392 


Baltimore City 


7,388 


8,022 


7,855 


8,814 


10,960 


8,608 


Calvert 


343 


289 


336 


292 


291 


310 


Caroline 


248 


204 


209 


200 


247 


222 


Carroll 


522 


456 


526 


527 


620 


530 


Cecil 


836 


753 


731 


614 


571 


701 


Charles 


654 


778 


709 


698 


670 


702 


Dorchester 


229 


261 


197 


220 


224 


226 


Frederick 


672 


657 


765 


802 


698 


719 


Garrett 


136 


100 


118 


104 


124 


116 


Harford 


961 


1,112 


1,082 


1,150 


1,274 


1,116 


Howard 


1,225 


1,167 


1,158 


1,294 


1,584 


1,286 


Kent 


87 


140 


77 


117 


112 


107 


Montgomery 


3,729 


3,893 


4,273 


3,996 


3,707 


3,920 


Prince George's 


7,445 


7,460 


8,483 


8,561 


8,914 


8,173 


Queen Anne's 


220 


187 


185 


193 


234 


204 


St. Mary's 


415 


488 


457 


349 


374 


417 


Somerset 


222 


192 


217 


210 


123 


193 


Talbot 


169 


173 


174 


153 


155 


165 


Washington 


702 


699 


683 


759 


714 


711 


Wicomico 


1,080 


914 


958 


956 


932 


968 


Worcester 


427 


321 


360 


310 


382 


360 


*Statewide Agencies 








1 


5 


11 


3 


State Total 


35,921 


36,682 


38,641 


39,721 


42,799 


38,753 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 



38 



LARCENY- 
THEFT 



LARCENY-THEFT 



Larceny-theft is the unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away 
of property from the possession or constructive possession of another. 

VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, a total of 128,483 larceny-thefts were reported, this 
represents a decrease of 1 percent over 2004. Larceny-theft accounted 
for 65 percent of the property crime total and 54 percent of the crime 
index. In 2005, there were 2,294.2 larceny-thefts per 100,000 
population. 

ANALYSIS OF LARCENY-THEFT 

Of the total larceny-thefts reported, the highest percentage 23 was theft 
of auto parts and accessories. Pocket-picking accounted for the lowest 
percentage, less than 1 percent. 

In 2005, 25,436 larceny- theft offenses were cleared with 22 percent of 
these clearances involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 23,399 persons were arrested for larceny-theft during 2005. 
The breakdown of persons arrested for larceny-theft was 65 percent male, 
35 percent female, 31 percent juvenile, 51 percent black, 48 percent 
white and 1 percent consisting of American Indian and Asian. 

Law Enforcement Agencies reported a total value of $ 82,422,125 stolen 
in larceny-theft offenses. 

NATURE OF LARCENY-THEFTS 



Classification 


Number of 


Percent 


Total 






Offenses 


Distribution 


Value 




Pocket -Picking 


489 


0% 


$ 110 


894 


Purse Snatching 


743 


1% 


197 


326 


Shoplifting 


19,616 


15% 


5,329 


118 


From Auto 


28,451 


22% 


17, 886 


166 


Auto Parts &. Access. 


29,596 


23% 


908 


233 


Bicycles 


3,755 


3% 


908 


233 


From Building 


16,273 


13% 


14,255 


135 


From Coin Operated 


870 


1% 


193 


290 


Machines 










All Other 


28,690 


22% 


35,268 


976 


Total 


128,483 


100% 


$ 75,057 


371 



40 



LARCENY-THEFT 



Total Number of Larceny-Thefts 




n n n n n 


100,000-- ------- ^ _ ^ 


n n n 




n 


1 



1980 1985 



1990 1995 



2000 2005 



4,000.0- 



3,500.0 



3,000.0- 



2,500.0 



2,000.0- 



1,500.0 



1,000.0 



500.0 



Larceny-Theft Rate per 100,000 Population 



0.0 



1975 



1995 



2000 



2005 



41 



Larceny-Theft by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


1,531 


1,481 


1,631 


1,557 


1,805 


1,601 


Anne Arundel 


12,288 


12,391 


13,234 


13,501 


13,747 


13,032 


Baltimore 


17,620 


19,019 


19,401 


21,201 


21,529 


19,754 


Baltimore City 


20,132 


21,819 


23,307 


27,301 


30,457 


24,603 


Calvert 


1,188 


954 


982 


853 


1,028 


1,001 


Caroline 


507 


558 


605 


547 


548 


553 


Carroll 


2,085 


1,878 


1,907 


1,948 


2,020 


1,968 


Cecil 


1,820 


1,940 


1,777 


1,827 


1,771 


1,827 


Charles 


2,989 


2,903 


3,036 


2,906 


2,848 


2,936 


Dorchester 


840 


799 


758 


810 


736 


789 


Frederick 


2,652 


2,861 


2,969 


3,344 


3,691 


3,103 


Garrett 


312 


320 


396 


367 


397 


358 


Harford 


3,591 


3,836 


3,857 


4,477 


4,005 


3,953 


Howard 


5.409 


5.091 


5,148 


5,469 


5,757 


5,375 


Kent 


194 


211 


196 


281 


209 


218 


Montgomery 


16,509 


16,083 


18,468 


19,733 


18,970 


17,953 


Prince George's 


28,457 


27,490 


26,952 


28,114 


28,111 


27,825 


Queen Anne's 


662 


668 


644 


615 


552 


628 


St. Mary's 


1,401 


1,314 


1,289 


1,284 


1,110 


1,280 1 


Somerset 


500 


455 


459 


415 


387 


443 


Talbot 


683 


669 


629 


642 


691 


663 


Washington 


2,306 


2,138 


2,091 


2,115 


2,156 


2,161 


Wicomico 


2,846 


2,715 


2,407 


2,454 


2,753 


2,635 


Worcester 


1,581 


1,725 


1,798 


1,819 


1,700 


1,725 


*Statewide Agencies 


380 


468 


428 


494 


616 


477 


State Total 


128,483 


129,786 


134,369 


144,074 


147,594 


136,861 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 



42 



MOTOR 

VEHICLE 

THEFT 



MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 

Motor vehicle theft is defined as the theft or attempted theft of 
a motor vehicle. 



VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, there were 34,070 motor vehicle thefts reported, this 
represents a 5 percent decrease over 2004. In 2005, there were 
608.4 motor vehicle thefts per 100,000 population. 



ANALYSIS OF MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 

During 2005, 69 percent of the motor vehicle thefts were 
automobiles, 25 percent were trucks and buses and 6 percent were 
other motor vehicles. There were 25,770 recovered vehicles 
accounting for 76 percent of the total reported stolen. 

In 2005, 3,853 motor vehicle thefts were cleared with 29 percent of 
these clearances involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 4,419 persons were arrested for motor vehicle theft 
during 2005. A breakdown of persons arrested for motor vehicle 
theft was 88 percent male, 12 percent female, 41 percent juvenile, 
71 percent black, 28 percent white and less than 1 percent 
consisting of American Indian and Asian. 

Law Enforcement Agencies reported a total value $ 228,864,837 
stolen in motor vehicle thefts. The value of recovered motor 
vehicles was $ 175,614,702, resulting in a loss of $ 53,250,135. 



5 YEAR TREND 





5 YEAR 














AVERAGE 


2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


Auto 


24, 769 


23,403 


24, 676 


25,448 


25,594 


24,725 


Truck 


8,075 


8, 522 


8, 995 


8,441 


7, 610 


6,806 


Other 


2,257 


2, 145 


2, 187 


2,517 


2,678 


1,758 


Total 


35,101 


34,070 


35,858 


36,406 


35,882 


33,289 



44 



MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 



Total Number of Motor Vehicle Theft 



40,000 
35,000 
30,000 
25,000 
20,000 
15,000 
10,000 
5,000 



1 I I I 
1990 1995 



Motor Vehicle Theft Rate per 


- 100,000 Population 




p 




n n n 




n 






■inn n 












0.0 1 ! 1 ' 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 1 


1 I I 1 1 ! ' ! I 1 ! ' I r M- 



1975 



45 



Motor Vehicle Theft by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


57 


55 


93 


89 


119 


83 


Anne Arundel 


1,524 


1,631 


1,441 


1,484 


1,258 


1,468 


Baltimore 


3,046 


2,936 


3,341 


3,491 


3,297 


3,222 


Baltimore City 


6,232 


6,731 


6,874 


6,572 


8,199 


6,922 


Calvert 


86 


74 


83 


82 


65 


78 


Caroline 


51 


77 


77 


48 


67 


64 


Carroll 


170 


151 


143 


135 


149 


150 


Cecil 


278 


264 


200 


195 


186 


225 


Charles 


627 


524 


585 


464 


392 


518 


Dorchester 


77 


92 


74 


79 


58 


76 


Frederick 


197 


221 


240 


263 


255 


235 


Garrett 


19 


16 


22 


22 


22 


20 


Harford 


359 


413 


330 


438 


414 


391 


Howard 


544 


598 


682 


619 


588 


606 


Kent 


24 


29 


21 


20 


19 


23 


Montgomery 


2,671 


2,730 


3,676 


3,958 


3,353 


3,278 


Prince George's 


17,242 


18,482 


17,628 


16,991 


13,670 


16,803 


Queen Anne's 


48 


20 


37 


36 


51 


38 


St. Mary's 


142 


107 


127 


133 


68 


115 


Somerset 


27 


26 


39 


24 


29 


29 


Talbot 


26 


36 


27 


15 


28 


26 


Washington 


261 


270 


273 


253 


268 


265 


Wicomico 


205 


185 


144 


198 


231 


193 


Worcester 


101 


92 


93 


93 


102 


96 


*Statewide Agencies 


56 


98 


156 


180 


401 


178 


|| State Total 


34,070 


35,858 


36,406 


35,882 


33,289 


35,101 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 



46 



ARSON 



ARSON 



Arson is any willful or malicious burning or attempt to burn, with or 
without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor 
vehicle or aircraft, personal property of another, etc. 

VOLUME AND RATE 

During 2005, there were 2,413 arsons reported, this represents a 
1 percent increase over 2004. In 2005, there were 43.1 arsons per 
100,000 population. Structures accounted for 38 percent, mobile 
accounted for 37 percent of the total number of arsons while other 
property accounted for 25 percent. Residential comprised 50 percent 
of the structures at which arson was directed, with 10 percent of all 
targeted structural property being uninhabited. The estimated value 
of property damage was approximately 21- million dollars. 

In 2005, 361 arsons were cleared with 56 percent of these clearances 
involving only juvenile offenders. 

A total of 572 persons were arrested for arson during 2005. A 
breakdown of persons arrested for arson was 85 percent male, 15 
percent female, 61 percent juvenile, 44 percent black, 55 percent 
white and 1 percent consisting of American Indian and Asian. 



DISTRIBUTION BY TYPE OF PROPERTY 



Classification 



Number of 
Offenses 



Percent 
Distrib 



Average Percent 
Value Cleared 



TOTAL STRUCTURAL 


928 


38.5 


16,758 


26 % 


Single Occupancy 


309 


12 .8 


17, 913 


28 % 


Residence 










Other Residential 


158 


6.5 


36,589 


25 % 


Storage 


41 


1.7 


38,953 


32 % 


Industrial/Mfg. 


11 


.5 


47, 192 


27 % 


Other Commercial 


79 


3.3 


7,420 


19 % 


Community/Public 


219 


9.1 


5,436 


31 % 


All Other Structures 


111 


4 .6 


3, 080 


13 % 


TOTAL MOBILE 


891 


36.9 


5,733 


4 % 


Motor Vehicle 


854 


35.4 


5, 193 


4 % 


Other Mobile Property 


37 


1.5 


18, 196 


5 % 


OTHER 


594 


24.6 


324 


15 % 


GRAND TOTAL 


2,413 


100.0 


8,641 


15 % 



48 



ARSON 



Total Number of Arsons 



4,000 
3,500 • 
3,000 
2,500 



2,000 



1,500 



1,000 



500 



- 


- 


n 


- 






- 










- 








- 








- 




- 




- 












- 












- 




- 






- 






1 




- 










- 




- 


n 


- 




- 




1 




1 












































1 




































1 








1 




1 




1 



Arson Rate per 100,000 Population 












n n n n 






O'O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 



1980 



1985 



2000 



2005 



49 



Arson by County 





2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


23 


21 


16 


19 


15 


19 


Anne Arundel 


154 


177 


160 


207 


209 


181 


Baltimore 


316 


315 


318 


363 


390 


340 


Baltimore City 


422 


431 


485 


347 


426 


422 


Calvert 


21 


19 


10 


17 


14 


16 


Caroline 


7 


3 


12 


11 


7 


8 


Carroll 


24 


29 


24 


25 


37 


28 


Cecil 


45 


42 


55 


49 


57 


50 


Charles 


28 


74 


44 


45 


70 


52 


Dorchester 


11 


16 


7 


9 


14 


11 


Frederick 


47 


37 


35 


39 


32 


38 


Garrett 


6 


6 


6 


2 


5 


5 


Harford 


47 


41 


52 


49 


50 


48 


Howard 


172 


156 


72 


7 


17 


85 


Kent 





4 


4 


5 


11 


5 


Montgomery 


315 


276 


201 


274 


264 


266 


Prince George's 


485 


514 


466 


574 


668 


541 


Queen Anne's 


11 


14 


12 


11 


10 


12 


Somerset 


10 


11 


5 


41 


6 


15 


St. Mary's 


33 


32 


35 


8 


44 


30 


Talbot 


4 


13 


7 


3 


9 


7 


Washington 


87 


59 


47 


54 


56 


61 


Wicomico 


44 


38 


31 


37 


28 


36 


Worcester 


15 


21 


24 


13 


9 


16 


*Statewide Agencies 


86 


29 


19 


224 


239 


119 


State Total 


2,413 


2,378 


2,147 


2,433 


2,687 


2,412 



* Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 



50 



DOMESTIC 
VIOLENCE 



DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 



The Domestic Violence Act of 1994 mandated that all law enforcement 
agencies in Maryland submit copies of their police reports of 
incidences involving domestic violence to the Maryland State Police. 
Through the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program, a revised 
Battered Spouse data collection form was created. This new form 
allowed for the collection of more data, which is based upon a 
revised definition of a domestic violence incident under the 
guidelines of the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program. 

Under the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program the definition 
for a domestic violence incident is considered "An individual who 
has received deliberate physical injury or is in f.ear of imminent 
deliberate physical injury from a current or former spouse or a 
current or former cohabitant . This includes a homosexual 

relationship. " In addition, a domestic violence incident in the 
Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program is considered, to be any 
crime against : 

• A married person living with their spouse. 

• A married person estranged from their spouse. 

• A male and female in an intimate relationship who 
are not married to each other and who are cohabiting 
or had cohabited. 

• Individuals of the same sex in an intimate 
relationship who are cohabiting or had cohabited. 

It should be noted that prior to 1996 the statistical information 
collected was only on assaults to domestic partner and did not 
include same sex in an intimate relationship who are cohabiting or 
had cohabited. The following information gives a more comprehensive 
report that includes statistics based on the revised definition of 
domestic violence including all crimes. 



52 



DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CRIMES 

There are limitations to the information collected which should be 
clearly understood before any conclusions are drawn from the data 
presented in this report. Procedures for handling domestic violence 
crimes vary between law enforcement agencies and counties of 
occurrence . 

The current method of collecting domestic violence information for 
this report provides less than a complete picture. There is at 
present, no other statewide informational system in general use 
gathering these statistics from law enforcement agencies that will 
more accurately perform this task. 

The Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 or 
2003 Domestic Violence Statistics to the Maryland Uniform Crime 
Reporting Program due to data conversion. Therefore, there was a 
total of 22,092 domestic violence crimes reported in 2005 as 
compared to 23,013 crimes in 2004, resulting in a 4 percent 
decrease. The breakdown is as follows: 



Crime 



2001 



2002 



*2003 



2004 



2005 



Homicide 


22 


22 


15 


28 


22 


Rape 


62 


55 


58 


67 


49 


Robbery 


46 


42 


30 


62 


77 


Assaults 


19,636 


17, 690 


16, 699 


21, 365 


20,482 


Burglary 


61 


87 


68 


112 


96 


Larceny 


111 


139 


88 


99 


108 


Motor Vehicle Theft 


3. 


6 


6 


4 


12 


Arson 


7 


7 


6 


7 


4 


Forgery 


10 


13 


8 


8 


7 


Fraud 


6 


4 


8 


2 


4 


Embezzlement 











1 





Malicious Destruction 


113 


136 


130 


202 


179 


of Property 












Illegal Weapons 


1 





1 





3 


Prostitution 


1 











1 


Sex Offenses 


8 


10 


9 


6 


3 


Drug Possession 








1 


1 





Offenses Against 


16 


285 


435 


507 


591 


Family & Children 












Disorderly Conduct 


6 


6 


4 


20 


20 


All Other Offenses 


579 


402 


294 


522 


434 



Total 



20,688 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



53 



ASSAULTS 

Assault is the most frequent domestic violence incident reported. 
During 2005, there were 20,482 domestic assaults, representing a 
4 percent decrease over 2004 domestic violence assaults. There were 
4,668 domestic assaults reported as aggravated. Aggravated assaults 
were 23 percent of the total reported domestic assaults in 2005. 



2001 *2002 *2003 2004 2005 



Aggravated 



Firearm 


191 


187 


177 


215 


218 


Knife 


898 


811 


763 


1,023 


922 


Other Weapons 


1,749 


1,489 


1,412 


2,034 


1,422 


No Weapons 


1,589 


1,406 


1,381 


2,246 


2, 106 



Non Aggravated 



Simple 


15,204 


13,788 


12, 959 


15, 829 


15,798 


Stalking 


5 


9 


7 


18 


16 


Total 


19,636 


17,690 


16,699 


21,365 


20,482 


MONTHLY OCCURRENCES 












2001 


*2002 


*2003 


2004 


2005 


January 


1,648 


1, 564 


1,494 


1,933 


1,745 


February 


1,449 


1,384 


1, 150 


1,777 


1,520 


March 


1, 681 


1, 638 


1,576 


1, 882 


1, 946 


April 


1,674 


1, 546 


1,418 


1,905 


2,010 


May 


1,828 


1,602 


1,458 


2,071 


1,948 


June 


1,928 


1,669 


1, 626 


1, 839 


1, 985 


July 


2, 004 


1, 765 


1,615 


2, 075 


2, 099 


August 


1,880 


1,708 


1,530 


2,116 


1, 926 


September 


1,670 


1,636 


1,604 


1,955 


1,750 


October 


1,656 


1,469 


1,509 


1, 847 


1,794 


November 


1, 545 


1,482 


1,403 


1,750 


1,693 


December 


1,725 


1,441 


1,477 


1,863 


1,676 


Total 


20,688 


18,904 


17,860 


23,013 


22,092 



* Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



54 



HOUR OF DAY 



2001 *2002 *2003 2004 2005 



12 


00 


A.M. 


1 


00 


A.M. 


2 


00 


A.M. 


3 


00 


A.M. 


4 


00 


A.M. 


5 


00 


A.M. 


6 


00 


A.M. 


7 


00 


A.M. 


8 


00 


A.M. 


9 


00 


A.M. 


10 


00 


A.M. 


11 


00 


A.M. 


12 


00 


Noon 


1 


00 


P.M. 


2 


00 


P.M. 


3 


00 


P.M. 


4 


00 


P.M. 


5 


00 


P.M. 


6 


00 


P.M. 


7 


00 


P.M. 


8 


00 


P.M. 


9 


00 


P.M. 


10 


00 


P.M. 


11 


00 


P.M. 



1, 045 


1 


048 


981 


1 


231 


1 


107 


1,099 




947 


890 


1 


340 


1 


192 


794 




806 


725 


1 


086 




926 


612 




506 


506 




776 




701 


383 




383 


352 




511 




451 


258 




301 


249 




371 




356 


306 




243 


277 




407 




363 


415 




355 


375 




497 




480 


446 




445 


475 




653 




597 


549 




524 


534 




680 




732 


779 




648 


631 




746 




765 


890 




771 


733 




794 




822 


887 




754 


675 




815 




851 


817 




800 


663 




756 




740 


771 




695 


651 




797 




874 


879 




838 


706 




813 




902 


908 




856 


825 




, 015 




986 


997 • 




849 


812 




,057 




,003 


1, 140 




983 


978 




,224 




, 114 


1,168 




,146 


982 




,341 




,203 


1,295 




, 165 


1, 114 




, 514 




,405 


1,376 




,258 


1,244 




, 511 




,478 


1,466 




,259 


1,262 




, 567 




, 543 


1,408 




,324 


1, 220 




,511 




, 501 



Total 20,688 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



Analysis 

In 2005, 43 percent of all domestic violent crimes occurred between 
the hours of 7:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M ., inclusive . Thirty-five percent 
of domestic violent crimes occurred during Saturday and Sunday. 
When combining these two categories this would indicate that an 
intensive period for domestic violent crimes occur between 7:00 P.M. 
and 1:00 A.M. on Saturday and Sunday. 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



55 



DAY OF WEEK 



2001 



*2002 



2003 



2004 



2005 



Monday 
Tuesday- 
Wednesday 
Thursday 
Friday 
Saturday 
Sunday 



2 


822 


2 


494 


2 


321 


3 


043 


3 


004 


2 


767 


2 


524 


2 


270 


2 


844 


2 


957 


2 


620 


2 


281 


2 


372 


2 


850 


2 


669 


2 


474 


2 


382 


2 


088 


2 


981 


2 


797 


2 


738 


2 


569 


2 


407 


3 


157 


2 


853 


3 


486 


3 


140 


3 


052 


3 


816 


3 


834 


3 


781 


3 


514 


3 


350 


4 


322 


3 


978 



Total 



20,688 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



VICTIMS 

Sex 



2001 



2002 



*2003 



2004 



2005 



Female 
Male 



15, 512 
5, 176 



14, 087 
4, 817 



13,321 17,459 16,816 
4,539 5,554 5,276 



Total 



20,688 



18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



Race 



2001 



*2002 



•2003 



2004 



2005 



American 


Indian 


17 




7 


9 




17 


17 


Asian 




231 




186 


190 




171 


188 


Black 




8,856 


7 


517 


7,092 


11 


275 


10, 691 


White 




11,086 


10 


627 


9,957 


11 


084 


10,787 


Other 




498 




567 


612 




466 


409 


Total 




20,688 


18 


,904 


17,860 


23 


,013 


22,092 



Age 

Sixty-five percent of the victims of domestic violence are between 
25 to 44 years of age, inclusive. 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



56 



RELATIONSHIPS 

The domestic violence report collects five victim relationships, 
either current or former. The victim in the following was the: 

2001 *2002 *2003 2004 2005 



Husband 


2,863 


2,561 


2 


399 


2,548 


2,398 


Wife 


8,231 


7, 140 


6 


585 


7,207 


7, 116 


Cohabitant 














Male 


2, 191 


2,211 


2 


080 


2,872 


2,788 


Female 


7, 113 


6,859 


6 


640 


10,055 


9,491 


Homosexual 


290 


133 




156 


331 


299 


Total 


20,688 


18, 904 


17 


860 


23,013 


22,092 



HOUSEHOLD STATUS 



2001 *2002 *2003 2004 2005 



Living Together 15,994 14,455 13,983 16,935 16,660 
Estranged 4,387 4,236 3,659 5,401 4,935 

Unknown 307 213 218 677 497 



Total 20,688 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



ALCOHOL AND DRUG INVOLVEMENT 

In domestic violence reporting the use of alcohol, drugs or both by 
either the offender or victim are captured. 

2001 *2002 *2003 2004 2005 



Alcohol 


5,299 


5,436 


5,267 


5, 601 


5,478 


Drugs 


206 


214 


223 


271 


308 


Alcohol Sc Drugs 


151 


177 


164 


150 


172 


None 


8,723 


9, 322 


8,220 


9,270 


9, 564 


Unknown 


6,309 


6, 755 


3, 986 


7, 721 


6, 570 



Total 20,688 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 

57 



CIRCUMSTANCES 



2001 *2002 *2003 2004 2005 



Alcohol 




660 




626 




659 




641 




629 


Drug 




194 




190 




214 




211 




211 


Food or Cooking 




133 




159 




146 




145 




130 


Friends 




188 




182 




187 




170 




188 


Gambling 




4 




13 




7 




7 




12 


Household Chores 




189 




210 




175 




167 




187 


Infidelity 


1 


,726 


1 


,751 


1 


, 578 


1 


646 


1 


,648 


Job or Lack of Job 




137 




143 




130 




132 




112 


Mental Imbalance 




102 




99 




129 




114 




106 


of Either 






















Money 




936 




914 




909 




832 




896 


Offspring 


1 


,255 


1 


,158 


1 


, 062 


1 


124 


1 


,062 


Property 




822 




830 




802 




841 




755 


Relatives 




157 




138 




158 




163 




177 


Sex 




225 




264 




231 




218 




233 


Sports or Hobby 




12 




9 




8 




14 




8 


Television 




46 




60 




70 




64 




55 


Separation 




709 




642 




614 




627 




551 


Divorce 




131 




147 




168 




168 




149 


Reconciliation 




76 




51 




63 




60 




63 


Staying Out Late 




467 




457 




413 




378 




372 


Other 


4 


,024 


4 


,400 


4 


,105 


4 


,892 


5 


,348 


Unknown 


8 


,495 


6 


,461 


6 


,032 


10 


,399 


9 


,200 


Total 


20 


,688 


18 


,904 


17 


,860 


23 


,013 


22 


,092 



CLEARANCES 

There are two ways of clearing a case. One is by making an arrest 
and charging the person (s) with the offense. The second is known as 
an exceptional clearance. Exceptional clearance means the police 
know the identity and location of the person (s) who committed the 
offense and have enough information to arrest them. However, there 
is some reason beyond their control that prevents them from making 
the arrest . 

The arrest and exceptional clearances reported reflect the 
disposition at the time the domestic violence report form was 
forwarded to the Uniform Crime Reporting Program. These reports are 
not updated, therefore, other arrests and exceptional clearances may 
occur but would not be reflected in the following totals. 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



58 



2001 



*2002 



2003 



2004 



2005 



Arrest 


8,446 


7,274 


7, 088 


10, 141 


9,506 


Exceptional 


7,486 


7, 593 


6, 994 


7, 710 


7,411 


Unknown 


4,756 


4,037 


3,778 


5, 162 


5, 175 



Total 



20,688 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



During 2005, 77 percent of all domestic violence cases were cleared. 
A breakdown of the clearances in 2005, were 43 percent by arrest, 
34 percent by exceptional and 23 percent unknown, compared to 44 
percent by arrest, 34 percent by exceptional and 22 percent unknown 
in 2004 . 



Domestic Violence 

Number of Domestic Violence Incidences 



25.000 



20,000 



15,000 



10,000 



5,000 



2001 



•2002 



*2003 



2004 



2005 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



59 



COUNTY TOTALS 



2001 



*2002 



*2003 



2004 



2005 



STATE 



20,668 18,904 17,860 23,013 22,092 



REGION I 


1,991 


2,097 


2,061 


1,913 


1,931 


Caroline Co. 


202 


164 


154 


123 


150 


Cecil Co. 


418 


411 


397 


352 


333 


Dorchester Co. 


144 


175 


207 


146 


181 


Kent Co . 


68 


57 


49 


43 


35 


Queen Anne ' s Co . 


127 


132 


131 


114 


98 


Somerset Co. 


91 


108 


92 


152 


113 


Talbot Co. 


111 


120 


110 


116 


106 


Wicomico Co. 


512 


575 


514 


471 


501 


Worcester Co. 


318 


355 


407 


396 


414 


REGION II 


1,644 


1,862 


1,685 


1,561 


1,595 


Calvert Co. 


253 


355 


360 


295 


373 


Charles Co. 


808 


857 


743 


649 


658 


St. Mary's Co. 


583 


650 


582 


617 


564 


REGION III 


1,946 


2,079 


1,929 


1,816 


2,030 


Allegany Co. 


292 


280 


279 


296 


286 


Carroll Co. 


517 


525 


448 


408 


418 


Frederick Co. 


634 


697 


620 


535 


732 


Garrett Co. 


68 


84 


76 


84 


94 


Washington Co. 


435 


493 


506 


493 


500 



REGION IV 



5,575 



4,995 



4,640 



4,363 



3,968 



Montgomery Co. 
Pr. George's Co 

REGION V 

Anne Arundel Co 
Baltimore City 
Baltimore Co. 
Harford Co. 
Howard Co. 



2 


274 


2 


027 


2 


092 


2 


005 


1 


625 


3 


301 


2 


968 


2 


548 


2 


358 


2 


343 


9 


529 


7 


870 


7 


544 


13 


360 


12 


568 


1 


572 


1 


501 


1 


341 


1 


220 


1 


259 


1 


492 




4 




2 


5 


643 


4 


991 


5 


047 


4 


902 


4 


766 


5 


060 


4 


829 




753 




787 




760 




684 




685 




665 




676 




675 




753 




804 



STATEWIDE AGENCIES 



Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence statistics 
to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



60 



ill s 



ffl 


dPdP 


dPdP 


dp 


(*> 


<*> 


dpdp 




■*> 


£*> dip 


df dfi 


dPdP 


c*- <*P 


<*> <*> 


(«> <^ 


c^P <*> 


(^ 


<*> 


V 


a» H 


O H 


< fS 


< CN 


<o 


o ro 


<< 


<i:o 





m 


00 a\ 


•r 00 


rH o\ 


^^0 


U) <T\ 


VC 












^^ • 


^ • 


^ ■ 




^--^ 






















fn 




o o 


:z;o 


S o 


so 


o o 


22 


20 








(N ON 


m in 





(N rj 


(N ro 





ON 



H 
O 
H 

O 
H 

u 

u 
z 

o 
> 

O 

Q 
O 

o 



"I 
'"is 

o h -Q 



dPdP dPdP 



M 00 



in n 



H 00 
00 o 



< o < o 



22 



22 



<o 
20 



2 



<:o 
^ 1-1 

2 



<o 
2 



<; in 



VOCN 


■<j< 00 


rt;fs 


<M 


<cr, 


r- H 


H 


wo 


-^LD 




H in 




2 


2 


2 



00 rH fN 



dPdP 
VO Tl< 



VO M 



<T\ ON 

in o 



o o 
o o 



(N 


r- rH 


rH r- 


fN 


<T\ m 


Tl"* 


00 00 


(N CTl 


[^ Ln 


KO ID 


•<!» 


rH •^ 


rH 


^ ^ 


in 00 












in in 


iH m 








H 










in 


r^ LD 


M<rH 


r^ \D 


i> r- 


VO 


in KD 


CN CTl 


a CTl 


Tt 00 


ro 


in (T> 


rH 


in ';)< 


00 rH 



rf (j\ <j\ m ON fN 

O in CTl rH 00 CTl 

^ m in CO fN 



voo COON (N0^ rf'*' in^ 
ONTj< '3't^ mm r-fN tNtN 

ONVO mo r-i ^ rr r-o 



gfe gfa Sfc 2 fc 2 fc g pn 2 fc 2 Pu 2fc 2 t. g fc 



2 fc 2 tu 2 t, 



■U to 

(6 0) 

u ra 

•H c 

U (I) 

-H VW 

ra 4-1 



n 

V o 

H 



rH 4J 

•n E 



(U 

en 

c 

fC c 
Q O 

a 

^H re 






3 

o 

u 

0) 

en 
c 

(0 c 

Q o 

a 

u to 

(U 0) 



61 



in 



-. -p y 

o d ^ 

o (1) _3 

0- 5 



o o 



o m 
o o 



o o 
o o 



dP dP 
o o 
o o 



oV> oV= oV o>P dP <jP 

o o o o o o 
o o o o o o 



llll 
* 






oV> dP oV oV o¥= oV dP dP oV o¥= oV= o¥= o¥J oVJ dP dP dP dP 

■*vx) 'S'MD LTiLD T}<vo r~n ODCN oo r~m ror~ 



dP dP 
o o 



u 
s^ 

> 

U 

z 

o 
> 

u 

H 

o 

o 

o 
z 

o 



in m 
CD cr\ 



OS 






u 






^ 




tH 


s 




4-> 




u 




4J 
CO 




a 


TJ 







0) 




•rt 


J-) 




4) a 


(0 




10 


> 




u n 


m 




•H a 


M 




>M 0) 


en 




•H m 


cn 




n >u 


< 




n o 






10 


c 




H MJ 







O 


s 












cn 


H 




-H 
.-H 


3 


E 


n3 



43 O 

0) H 

> 

O Q) 



62 



< 

H 
O 
H 
b 
O 
H 
Z 

u 

PC 

u 

> 

oa 

u 

o 
> 

y 

H 

u 
o 

Q 
b 
O 

O 






c 



-H < < 

13 13 2i 



SP dP 6P dC dP dP dPdP 

OO OO (NVD OO 

OO OO OO OO 



o'P dP 
O O 



S fe 



(0 a) 

U 0] 

•H C 

lU 0) 

-H >W 

n >4-i 

10 O 

le 

o o 



dpdp 


dpdp 




dpdp 


dpdp 


O o 
O o 


o o 

OO 


<< 


O <N 


O H 
O O 



dpdp 

o o 



dpdp dpdp 

o o o o 

o o o o 






dpdp 

o o 



dpdp dpdp 

O O H <Tl 

o o n vo 

(N 00 H 00 



r« 00 

CO ^ 
(N 









C! 

























-H 








« 




4J 








10 




U 








M 


0) 


3 








V 


n 


u 




0] 




(U 


C 


4J 




c 




,c! 


0) 


m 


>. 







U 


4J 


(U 


ij 


ft 






(1) 


Q 


u 


« 




t3 


U 




0) 


0) 




(0 


cu 


CO 


ft 


s 




« 












tr 




(I) 


o 


u 


iH 


. 


w 


-H 


Ol, 


(B 


(D 


X) 


rH 


O 




01 


01 


3 


(0 


•H 


^ 


tt) 


M 


rt 


h 


iH 


o 


r-l 





M 




(0 




rH 


b 


tM 




s 




H 



0) 

m 4J 

C ft 

0) (1) 

14-1 U 

«4-l X 

o w 



(0 w -r 
tjid) j: 
<Q ft 

C-H 1 

M-l TO li 
>4-l Ck *■ 

o 



> 




I 

I 

•c 

u 



73 
Q 



O 
O 

rs 

>^ 

c 



X) 

C 



CQ Oh 



63 



DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BY COUNTY 





2005 


2004 


**2003 


**2002 


2001 


5 Year 
Average 


Allegany 


286 


296 


279 


280 


292 


287 


Anne Arundel 


1,259 


1,220 


1,341 


1,501 


1,572 


1,379 


Baltimore 


4,829 


5,060 


4,766 


4,902 


5,047 


4,921 


Baltimore City 


4,991 


5,643 


2 


4 


1,492 


2,426 


Calvert 


373 


295 


360 


355 


253 


327 


Caroline 


150 


123 


154 


164 


202 


159 


Carroll 


418 


408 


448 


525 


517 


463 


Cecil 


333 


352 


397 


411 


418 


382 


Charles 


658 


649 


743 


857 


808 


743 


Dorchester 


181 


146 


207 


175 


144 


171 


Frederick 


732 


535 


620 


697 


634 


644 


Garrett 


94 


84 


76 


84 


68 


81 


Harford 


685 


684 


760 


787 


753 


734 


Howard 


804 


753 


675 


676 


665 


715 


Kent 


35 


43 


49 


57 


68 


•50 


Montgomery 


1,625 


2,005 


2,092 


2,027 


2,274 


2,005 


Prince George's 


2,343 


2,358 


2,548 


2,968 


3,301 


2,704 


Queen Anne's 


98 


114 


131 


132 


127 


120 


Somerset 


113 


152 


92 


108 


91 


111 


St. Mary's 


564 


617 


582 


650 


583 


599 


Talbot 


106 


116 


110 


120 


111 


113 


Washington 


500 


493 


506 


493 


435 


485 


Wicomico 


501 


471 


514 


575 


512 


515 


Worcester 


414 


396 


407 


355 


318 


378 


*Statewide Agencies 








1 


1 


3 


1 


State Total 


22,092 


23,013 


17,860 


18,904 


20,688 


20,511 



*Statewide agencies report offenses but do not identify county of occurrence. 
**Baltimore Police Department was unable to provide any 2002 and 2003 Domestic Violence 
statistics to the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program due to data conversion. 



64 



INDEX OFFENSE DATA 

The tables contained within this section were designed to provide 
quick reference to statistical crime information relative to the 
different reporting areas of the State of Maryland. 

The tables are broken down by Region. Within each Region 
information is listed in County name sequence and is further 
detailed to show the activity experienced by individual police 
agencies. The general identifying descriptions which indicate the 
reporting areas are listed and defined as follows: 



Regional Total 



This line indicates the total activity 
of all the Counties within the indicated 
Region . 



County Total 



This line indicates the total activity 
of all reporting Agencies within the 
indicated County. 



Sheriff 



This line indicates the total activity 
reported by Sheriff's Offices. This 
includes activity which may have 
occurred within the corporate limits of 
towns in that County. 



County Police 
Department 



This line indicates the total activity 
reported by County Police Departments. 
This includes activity which may have 
occurred within the corporate limits of 
towns in that County. 



State Police 



This line indicates the total activity 
reported by all State Police 
installations within the indicated 
reporting area. This includes activity 
which may have occurred within the 
corporate limits of towns in that 
County. 



Municipal 

Police 

Departments 



This line indicates the total activity 
reported by the specified police 
departments and includes only those 
crimes which were handled by that 
department . 



65 



There are five regions used in the Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting 
Program which are listed below. 



Region I - Eastern Shore 



f 



Caroline County 

Cecil County 11 

Dorchester County s l 

Kent County 

Queen Anne ' s County 

Somerset County 

Talbot County 

Wicomico County 

Worcester County 

Region II - Southern Maryland 

Calvert County 
Charles County 
St. Mary's County 

Region III - Western Maryland 



Allegany County 
Carroll County 
Frederick County 
Garrett County 
Washington County 

Region IV - Washington Metropolitan 

Montgomery County 
Prince George ' s County 

Region V - Baltimore Metropolitan 

Anne Arundel County 
Baltimore City 
Baltimore County 
Harford County 
Howard County 



Crime Rates for the individual agencies are not calculated in the 
following table because of overlapping jurisdictions in many cities 
of municipal, county and state law enforcement agencies. This 
table contains the offenses as reported by the individual agencies 
with crime rates for the county and region totals. Arson offenses 
are listed opposite the agency reporting the Arson and are not 
computed in the total offenses or crime rates. 



66 



if 



U) O « <T\ IT\ f 



Pi W 



00 r^ iH 

LT) O 



a\ 00 « (N o 



in 00 CTv 



in vo ii> 









cnoorH* i-(c^in« u) 



o r- o 



(N r^ i^ 



- i 

U Q- 



ui (N in 



O ^q 
H U 



Cfi a\ (N 



67 



o m VD 



H 
U Q 

a< U 



oi [^ in 



o 


s 


f-1 


w 


s 


s 


u 


K 


Q 


U 




< 


Oi 


H 


U) 


W 


s 


Q 



68 



H 

> w 

\ X 






►a s 

< PQ 

O fc 

B o 



(!< O 
O M 



vr) o o 



r^ c\ n 



Ol (N vo 



m (N p- 



CM o o 



69 



O Q 



o- o 

O M 

ft H 



.-H O O 



(N O O 



ID in o 



O CTl O 



r- 00 ID 



CO (N tN 

1/1 in U3 



O LD VD 



LTl o in 



U K 
O K 



70 



<£ 


Pi 


Q 


w 


Z. 


Q 


bi 


g 


^ 


S 






s 




u 


H 




O Q 


ec 


a, Bi 


u 




5 




fi 




1 




U 


O J 


> 


H U 


« 




< 




^ 


^§ 




< w 




H E^ 



0. o 

O M 

a. H 



O VD O 



r^ r- o 



r^ CTv « (N in in 



VD VD o 



in * p- cN 



71 



r~ [^ cpi 



z g 



r- o vo 
^^ (N r^ 



O [^ LTI 



< < 



a\ rH (N 



Cr> iH (N 



in 1/1 o 



Ln Ln o 



Q£ 






















u 


H 






(N 


vj" 


o 




CN 


<# 


o 




U 


Q 


















ac 


Ci^ 


K 


















u 


W 


J 








(N 








fN 


a 


U 


















3 






















o 






















z 

< 


J 










'I' 






'T 


■a- 


< 


Q 




CN 








(N 


,H 






Oi 








^ 








U) 




J 


















>> 


f-, 


U 


















Qi 






















< 






















S 


J 


§ 




t^ 


t^ 


G^ 




I^ 


l> 


m 




< 


u 




U) 


in 






U) 


in 








b 








^ 








•"J" 






fa 








tH 








iH 




H 


O 








1 











rH ^ O 






It 



u 


H 


H 


2 


cn 


W 


w 


s 


X 


K 


u 


U 




< 


a. 


H 


w 


U 


2 


Q 



W t-l 



o u 



72 



5S 






r~ r- cr> 



0> 00 (N 



o r^ in 



o in o 



U) in r^ 



1' 'T o 



■<r (N o 



fN r^ r~ 



in ro o « a\ r- CTi 



(N iH o 



r~ rH t^ « r~ r~ 



< Q 

H Di 

O J 

H U 



rH t^ •>!• 

ID o 



a\ (N iH 

00 (N 



CTi U) VD 



< U 

O fc 
H O 






[I. M 

o a 

O 



73 



> w 






o en 



t. 




^ 


S^ 


a. 


D- 
^ 


g 




X 




u 


n; 


Q 


u 


z 


Q 


u 




2 


^ 






s 




u 


H 




U O 


ce. 


a a 


u 


a U 


3 




Q 




Z 

< 




-i 


O J 


> 


H U 


cc 




< 




S 


►J 2 




< W 




H U. 




O fc 




H O 



r^ u-i o 



^ 
^ 5 



74 



H 

> u 



r^ o >fi 



r^ r^ o 



LTI ^D 00 

r-l TJ" 

[^ 00 •»>• 



o ■* 

in u) 



O a 



in ■<}i o 



[^ CO o\ 



O Cu 
H O 



p-3 M 
< X 



< U 



75 






< < 



tn ^ o * un ^ o 



rH IJ3 LD 



H 




OS 


u 


2 


a- 


OS 




X 




u 


oi 


Q 


(a 


z 


Q 


u 




s 


^ 






s 




u 


H 




U Q 


a: 


K K 


u 


£d 


3 




Q 




Z 
< 


^§ 


^ 


o 3 


>■ 


H U 


ct 




< 




s 


J 2 




< W 








O &< 




H O 



^ rf \D 



(N ♦ U) 



5 W 



^y 



76 



2 H 
U iu 






;:; g 



U Q 

ft CJ 



en 

< w 

O 6^ 
H O 



a. o 
O n 



moo 



r- r- LD 



in (N o 



CT\ •^ VO 



>^ (N CN * in r^ o 



o a> r^ 



t^ r- o 



<ji ■* in 



vo in [^ 



■-I rH in 






77 



J 2 

< W 

H tu 

O li- 

H O 



(N rH in 



o o ♦ in o o 



rH ixi in 



in o o * in o o 
in in • ♦ in in 

(N CN CM * (N (N (N 



o\ r~ (N 



[^ CT^ 00 

U3 00 CM 



Cu O 
O M 



I Q 



78 



■>!• rn rH 

a\ o 

rj. VD (N 



r- 1/1 vo 



rr in 00 

«) CO 

r- [^ + 

(N (N 

Ol VD fN 

in m 

r^ u) U3 



o vo o 



E 


a 
^ 


g 




X 




u 


K 


a 


w 


z 


Q 


u 




s 


^ 






Cj 


H 




U Q 


ai 


a K 


u 


ft u 


a 




o 




z 






> 


H O 


Qi . 




< 




S 


CO 




< W 




H &- 




O Ci- 




H O 



en a\ (N 



79 



CN CTl cr\ 



in cr> o 



< H 




rH 


O 


rH 


^ J 




U) 






O W 




(N 


(N 




O W 








rH 


< < 








+ 



VD rH r~ 



a< o 

O M 



<N tn VD 



(N rH O 



■ • J 

H O 



w 


u. 


^ 


u. 




K 




I>1 


H 


EC 


0) 


W 



^s 



< Ixl 

O fc 
H O 



o o « o o 



tN O « O O 



T}" •>j< tn 



tn in « o o 



r^ o u) 






o o o 



r-- o vx) 



< < 



>i) rsi r- 



tN n o 



;: g 



■* O U) 



CPl O U3 ♦ O O 






D 2; 

Oi O 

O M 



O •<l> * CTl ^ 



CT\ •>!> U3 



H 




-< 


Q 


H 


0. 


m 






» 


o 


H 


a 




D 


C/] 


PQ 


a 


H 


w 




> 


O 





X m 



82 



«) in [^ 



in LTl rH 



O CO 

< < 



'i 


K 


Q 


w 


Z 


Q 


U 


g 


S 


2 


s 




o 


H 




O Q 


cc 


a a 



O fc 
H O 



D 3 

tx O 

O M 

a. H 



(N r- r- 



(N <N O 



(MOO 



83 






< < 



U Q 



< D 
O J 






■q> ^ U) 

O .H 



r^ ON ♦ o o 



r- cN ♦ o o 



r- r^ m 



u) r~ .H 

in in 

U) in in 



in in 

(N tN 



D Z 

a o 

O M 



84 



n cr\ rH 
r~ o 



o (N in 



rf ^ KD 

in 00 

<N CM (N 



O U) O 

O n 

rH rH 1^ 



o in o 



o in o 



U) (N o 



•^ •sr o 



00*00 



U Q 




m 


CN 




b: a 








t^ 


W J 








CM 


a u 










J 










< D 




in 


in 




H a 




•<J< 


m 


CN 



CN CM cri 



o CN r^ 

o\ 00 

U) in in 



C3^ t^ 
in r- 



P< O 
O M 



< X 
O CO 



85 



in in o 



(^ ■^ CN 

o O (N 



Oi 


m 


2 




U 




a, 




X 




w 


jy 


Q 


W 


Z 


Q 


u 


g 


s 


2 






Q£ 




U 


H 




O Q 


cc 


K a; 


u 


a u 


5 




a 




z; 

< 


J 
^g 


-i 


O J 


> 


H U 


Oi 




< 




S 


^g 




<C W 




H &. 




O tu 




H O 



•<}• qi o 



iH iH kO 






O t3< O 



O ON O 



IX) U) 



5 

D 2 



< >^ O 
O H cu 



86 



2; H 

a: u 



< O 

H a. 

o J 

H U 



< w 

O fc 



D 2 

a. o 

o n 

ft. H 



o m 
CO r- 

(N (N 



CT\ r- U) 



o\ ,-> (St 



<N <N o 



87 



.H iH in 



> W 

2 H 



r~ un vo 



[^ ■* m 



2 H 






o in o 



•5)< o o 



[^ 'd^ o> * r^ ^ o\ 



(N in o 



MD o o 



Z Q 

i i 



Qi rt a: 

3 



J 




ro 


in 


in 


< Q 










H o; 








<s< 


O J 








in 


H U 










w 










-q S 




O 


^ 


o 


< M 




O 


a\ 




H fc 




(N 


iH 


(N 



O [~- o 



O [^ o 



Cu o 
O M 



< O 



O b^ 
O M 



88 



< < 



u " ►J 



< D 

H ft: 

o J 

H O 



J 2 

< u 

H C". 

O l^ 

El O 






D 2 

O. O 

O >-i 

a. H 



CN O O 



■H O O 



O fN O * U3 CTl O 



•>»• ^ O 



O CT\ (^ 






89 









< Q 
O J 



O t- 
H O 



l/l ^ tN 



90 






< a 

H Pi 

o J 

H U 



IN VD o 

(N (N TJ" 



f»i in vo 

Tj" o 

(N (N in 



^ m r- 



Ou O 
O M 
a, H 



Id 



91 



r- o (^ 



U Q 
W J 

a. u 



2 w 



a< o 

2S 






(N O O 



5 < Q 

- O J 
> HO 

< 

< w 

H b< 

O b. 

E- O 



rH .-H O 



> a 



tn 


w 


b; 




fc! 


s 


M 


►-I 


g 


8 



92 



(N O O 



< u 

O fc 
H O 



1^ in r^ * o o 



in in o ♦ o [^ 



'^ a\ a\ 








H H 










w 


a M 


u 


u 


2 


Ul M 




- J 


a 


w o 


o. 


o a 


Q< 


o • 


W 


Cd H 


s 


o m 



93 



> w 






moo 



in r- o 



Oi 


a. 


i 


^ 


u 




oi 




X 




u 


Q:^ 


o 
z 




u 


2 


g 








s 




u 


^D 


a: 


Oi Di 


Cd J 


u 


a u 


s 




Q 


J 


Z 


< Q 


< 


H a^ 




O J 


>• 


H U 


cc 




< 


en 


s 


►J 2 


< td 




H t, 




O b- 




H O 



VO v)< O 






S^ 






94 






>H (N O ♦ O O 



U> ♦ O O 



(N r~ r- 



U Q 
a Pi 

0- U 



►J 

< D 

H Oi 

O iJ 

H O 



O fc 
H O 



D< O 



o o o « o o o 






J Cd 

< a: 



2 H 

O CQ 



95 



2; H 



H 




o: 


w 


2 


0< 


u 




tf 




X 




g 


a; 


z 


Q 


u 


g 


S 


2 






S 




u 


H 




U Q 


0£ 


K S 


u 


a. u 


D 




o 




z 

< 




O ^ 


> 


H U 


a: 




■< 




^ 


^g 



3 ** 



J u 



96 



- g 



< Q 

H a 

o ^ 

H u 



rH rH O 



IX) a\ in 



Q< O 

O M 



>H O 



H 2 
►J 5 
< O 



m o 



> H 



2 K 

O W 

0} > 

S M 



97 






(N r^ o\ 






P~ 00 CPl 



m o ui 



w 

< W 

O fc, 
H o 



a< o 

O M 



o o o 



o o o 



o 


w 




a; 




w 




s ^ 


u 


o 








u 




o 




K 




2 




Cti 




2 W 


u 


W 




W 




w 




M U 




a. 




Q 




0* 




H M 


o &. 






J 


M 






^>.^ 


S Ck 






O 


u 






M M 






? 


^ 






DQ H a. 








04 


% 






0- 5 • 

W O H 


m CO 






s 


m 






2 CJ W 



98 






CO T]< o 



(N »o in 



s ^ 



g^ 



D 2 

a o 
o w 



U) 00 00 

U) o 

n ro tn 



1-1 a\ (N 

o^ o 

o rr vo 

in i/i 



O (N o 



Of 




u 


H 


U Q 


Qi 


u a: 


u 


a. u 






o 


J 


z 


< Q 


•4! 


H Bi 


J 


O J 


> 


H U 


b: 




< 


w 


S 


J s 


< w 




H &. 




O fc 




H O 



tN CN O 



U) o ^^ 

(N U) 

t^ UD en 



H 






2 




>< 


U 






u 




g 


w 






a, 




u 



99 



H 
O D 



3 
n- o 

O M 



O (N O 



O (N O 



U 

Q ti. 

O X 

X W 



< M 

o » o 

K H 0. 



100 






U) m * o o 



§ 




z 


Q 


w 


g 




S 


s 




s 




u 


H 




U Q 


tf 


a Qi 


u 


ex U 



CTit^l/l* OOO* OOO 



o o o 



< Cd 

O fa 
H O 



OOt-« OOO* OOO 

in M- • ♦ • « 

t^ U) M" * + « + 



< M 
H O 



S H M O 

O M ^J M 

ffi a J w 

1 5 w M 

CI4 U H > 

w w S; 1-1 



M O 

H w 

M en 



101 



2 H 



rH O O 



CN O O 



n CD m * r~ o (N 

U3 00 • * rH rH 

iH ■-! in * rH 



E- 




U. 


u 


2 


(X 


u 




o: 




X 




§ 




z 


Q 


u 


g 


s 


S 


s 




u 


H 




U Q 


02 


a K 


u 


PQ iJ 


^ 




Q 






< Q 




O J 


> 


H O 


02 




< 




s 






< M 




H b- 




O Cn 




H O 



m n o * o o 



o o o 



o o o 



o o o 



3 u 




J >H S 


2 


O a u 

K 5 u 


O 


H w a 


w 


0- < o 




X a b. 


> 


O Pi & 




O H W 


Q 



H 
U W H 

ca > M 
wig 

Q M 5 



Q ft: H 

2 O M 








< 






u 




Q 








3 


u 


U 


tJ 


H 


W M 


< 


W J 


H 


i-i O 


W 


U D. 




2 


ci< 


w • 


w 


O H 


s: 


< m 



I 



102 



MUNICIPALITY 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 

Crime rates for individual cities and towns are listed in the following table. The 
rates for many cities are based on combined data reported by municipal, county and state 
law enforcement agencies due to overlapping jurisdiction. 



CRIME 


TOTAL 


MURDER 


RAPE 


ROBBERY 


AGGRAVATED 


BREAKING OR 


LARCENY 


M/V 


RATE 


OFFENSES 








ASSAULT 


ENTERING 


THEFT 


THEFT 



REGION I 


























CAROLINE COUNTY 


























DENTON 




2004 


5,392 





163 





1 


3 


9 


36 


105 


g 






2005 


4, 932 


7 


154 








7 


B 


29 


104 


6 






Change 


8 


5 


5.5 
















FEDERALSBURG 




2004 


6,016 


8 


158 





1 


2 


11 


37 


97 


10 






■2005 


6,743 


3 


176 





2 


5 


18 


48 


98 


5 






Change 


+ 12 


1 


+ 11.4 
















GOLDS BORO 




2004 


471 


7 


1 








1 


















2005 



































Change 


- 100 





- 100.0 
















GREENSBORO 




2004 


4,380 


8 


75 











6 


11 


48 


10 






2005 


4,249 


3 


75 





1 





11 


19 


40 


4 






Change 


3 






















HENDERSON 




2004 


1, 694 


9 


2 














1 





1 






2005 


1,694 


9 


2 


1 

















1 






Change 
























HILLSBORO 




2004 



































2005 



































Change 
























MARYDEL 




2004 


4,761 


9 


7 











1 





5 


1 






2005 



































Change 


- 100 





- 100.0 
















PRESTON 




2004 


7,785 


5 


45 








1 


2 


4 


34 


4 






2005 


2,773 





16 











1 


4 


11 









Change 


- 64 


4 


- 64.4 
















RIDGELY 




2004 


5,743 


7 


78 











8 


14 


51 


5 






2005 


5,399 


4 


73 





1 


1 


8 


10 


50 


3 






Change 


6 





6.4 
















* TEMPLEVILLE 




2004 



































2005 



































Change 
























CECIL COUNTY 


CECILTON 




2004 


208 


3 


1 











1 















2005 



































Change 


- 100 





- 100.0 
















CHARLESTOWN 




2004 


1,199 


3 


13 








1 


3 


5 


3 


1 






2005 


1,188 


3 


13 














10 


2 


1 






Change 





9 



















CHESAPEAKE 




2004 































CITY 




2005 
Change 

































ELKTON 




2004 


7, 178 


.8 


984 





6 


24 


75 


151 


665 


63 






2005 


7,407 


.9 


1,050 





3 


36 


96 


175 


674 


66 






Change 


3 


.2 


6.7 
















NORTH EAST 




2004 


5,903 


.5 


164 








4 


7 


18 


123 


12 






2005 


6,114 


.5 


172 








6 


7 


24 


113 


22 






Change 


+ 3 


.6 


+ 4.9 

















Although Templeville lies in Caroline and Queen Anne's Counties, for purposes of this report data for the 
been shown in Caroline County. 



104 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 



MURDEK KAPK 



PKKKYVI 1,I,K 




200b 
Change 


S,74G,8 
4 .3 


7\-r 
> 5, i 
















PORT DEPOSIT 




2004 


1,917.4 


13 











2 


4 


„ 








2005 


1,585.0 


11 











3 


3 








% 


Change 


17.3 


15.3 
















RISING SUN 


% 


2004 
2005 

Change 


J, 984 . 3 

5, 142 ,5 

t 29. 1 


71 
92 

+ 29.6 









' 










DORCHESTER COUNTY 


CAMBRIDGE 




2004 


7,575.6 


824 


1 


4 


12 


73 


149 


550 


35 






2005 


7,838.3 


855 





7 


42 


89 


112 


582 


23 




% 


Change 


4- 3.5 


■f 3.8 
















CHURCH CREEK 




2004 


1, 176.5 


1 
























2005 




























% 


Change 


- 100.0 


- 100.0 
















EAST NEW MARKET 




2004 

































2005 































% 


Change 






















ELDORADO 




2004 

































2005 




















c 










% 


Change 






















GALESTOWN 




2004 























r^ 


f- 






2005 























c 






% 


Change 






















HURLOCK 




2004 


5,419.8 


102 


1 


1 





5 


21 


62 


12 






2005 


6,587.1 


127 











3 


37 


75 


12 




% 


Change 


* 21.5 


+ 24.5 
















SECRETARY 




2004 


397.6 













1 


1 












2005 


198.8 
















1 


■J 







% 


Change 


50.0 


- 50.0 
















VIENNA 




2004 


3,571.4 



















1 









2005 


3,571.4 
















1 










% 


Change 






















KENT COUNTY 


BETTERTON 




2004 


2, 127.7 


8 











1 


- 










2005 


266.0 


1 














1 










% 


Change 


- 87.5 


- 87.5 
















CHESTERTOWN 




2004 


4,449.2 


210 





2 


7 


22 


42 


123 


14 






2005 


4,435.6 


200 


1 


3 


12 


42 


25 


106 


11 




% 


Change 


0.3 


4.8 
















GALENA 




2004 


934.6 


4 














^ 


■1 


r 






2005 


934.6 


4 











1 


1 


: 






% 


Change 






















* MILLINGTON 




2004 


3,605.8 


15 











2 


6 


6 


1 






2005 


4,086.5 


17 











2 


6 


9 







% 


Change 


•f 13.3 


+ 13.3 
















ROCK HALL 




2004 


1,836.0 


43 











1 


i: 


28 








2005 


1,080.7 


28 





1 








6 


19 


2 




% 


Change 


- 41.1 


- 34.9 

















Although Millmgton lies in Kent and Queen Anne's Counties, for purposes of this report data for the entire city 
shown m Kent County. 



105 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 









CRIME 


TOTAL 


MURDER 


RAPE 


ROBBERY 


AGGRAVATED 


BREAKING OR 


LARCENY 


M/V 








RATE 


OFFENSES 








ASSAULT 


ENTERING 


THEFT 


THEFT 


QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY 


BARCLAY 




2004 


699.3 


1 














1 












2005 


























Q 




% 


Change 


- 100.0 


- 100.0 
















CENTREVILLE 




2004 


4,802.0 


114 








1 


6 


6 


100 


1 






2005 


5,405.4 


138 





2 


2 


3 


25 


96 


10 




% 


Change 


+ 12.6 


+ 21.1 
















CHURCH HILL 




2004 


1, 132.1 


6 














3 


3 









2005 


1, 132.1 


6 














2 


4 







% 


Change 






















* QUEEN ANNE 




2004 


568.2 


1 

















1 









2005 































% 


Change 


- 100.0 


- 100.0 
















QUEENSTOWN 




2004 


30.9 


13 











1 


4 


g 









2005 


21.4 


9 














2 


6 


1 




% 


Change 


- 30.7 


- 30.8 
















SUDLERSVILLE 




2004 


3,836.3 


15 








1 





7 


-1 









2005 


4,603.6 


18 














5 


13 







% 


Change 


+ 20.0 


+ 20.0 
















SOMERSET COUNTY 


CRISFIELD 




2004 


7,165.8 


201 








5 


12 


38 


136 


10 






2005 


6,415.2 


182 








3 


7 


32 


135 


5 




% 


Change 


- 10.5 


9.5 
















PRINCESS ANNE 




2004 


7,845.6 


189 


1 


2 


9 


39 


41 


93 


4 






2005 


7,042.8 


186 





1 


17 


24 


45 


95 


4 




% 


Change 


- 10.2 


1.6 
















TALBOT COUNTY 


EASTON 




2004 


5,374.6 


678 





5 


23 


75 


94 


470 


11 






2005 


5,392.9 


698 


2 


8 


22 


63 


105 


491 


7 




% 


Change 


0.3 


2.9 
















OXFORD 




2004 


1,324.5 


10 











4 





6 









2005 


660.5 


5 











1 


2 


2 







% 


Change 


- 50.1 


- 50.0 
















ST. MICHAEL'S 




2004 


8,268.1 


95 





1 


2 


4 


17 


67 


4 






2005 


6,156.6 


70 











4 


22 


44 







% 


Change 


- 25.5 


- 26.3 
















TRAPPE 




2004 


613.0 


7 














2 


5 









2005 































% 


Change 


- 100.0 


- 100.0 
















WICOMICO COUNTY 


DELMAR 




2004 


4,153.8 


81 








3 


g 


20 


44 


6 






2005 


5,954.1 


122 





1 


3 


17 


27 


70 


4 




% 


Change 


+ 43.3 


- 50.6 
















FRUITLAND 




2004 


6,118.7 


233 








g 


42 


40 


136 


7 






2005 


8,468.8 


323 





1 


6 


63 


26 


218 


9 




% 


Change 


+ 38.4 


+ 38.6 
















HEBRON 




2004 


1,487.0 


12 











2 





10 









2005 


2,230.5 


18 





1 





2 


7 


8 







% 


Change 


- 50.0 


+ 50.0 

















Although Queen Anne lies in Queen Anne's 
been shown in Queen Anne's County. 



and Talbot Counties, for purposes of this report the entire data for 



106 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 







CUIMV. 


rOTAI, 


MUKDER 


HAPK 


ROHHEKY 


h'V.UAVhTlA, 


iii'i'AKirj'; 'A' 


\.hV\.\U 


M/V 






KATK 


OI-FENSES 








r- A'::;; 


-::■ : ■:: 




i !T 


MARDELA SPRINGS 


.■0U4 
2005 

■k Change 


1 , .W ( u 
1 , 648 .4 

* 20.0 


6 
♦ 20.0 
















PITTSVILLE 


2004 


507.6 


6 











1 


2 


3 







2006 


1,607.4 


19 











4 


7 


8 







% Change 


* 216.7 


+ 216.7 
















SALISBURY 


2004 
2005 

% Change 


11,000.3 
11,697.7 

♦ 6.3 


2,802 
3,082 

+ 10.0 


' 


21 

1-1 


148 
161 


315 
3 24 


5Ci 


w'.-i 




SHARPTOWN 


'2004 


1,232.7 


8 





^^ 


Q 


3 




■ 






2005 


462.2 


3 














1 


2 







* Change 


- 62.5 


- 62.5 
















WILLARDS 


2004 


852.9 


8 














4 


.; 






2005 


1.599.1 


15 


u 


1 








9 








% Change 


4 87.5 


- 87.5 
















WORCESTER COUNTY 


BERLIN 


2004 


3,470.2 


131 





4 


1 


9 


17 


99 


1 




2005 


3,310.9 


123 





I 


3 


4 


22 


91 


2 




% Change 


4.6 


6.1 
















OCEAN CITY 


2004 


20,566.2 


1,482 


■ 


10 


30 


196 


150 


1, 048 


4S 




2005 


21,513.0 


1,547 


1 


15 


49 


213 


232 


976 


53 




% Change 


+ 4.6 


+ 4.4 
















POCOMOKE CITY 


2004 


6,620.5 


277 








3 


25 


23 


222 






2005 


6,069.7 


244 





5 


4 


13 


32 


184 


6 




% Change 


- 8.3 


11.9 
















SNOW HILL 


2004 


2,409.6 


58 








I 


9 


13 


32 


3 




2005 


2,094.9 


49 











7 


11 


30 


1 




% Change 


- 13.1 


15.5 
















REGION II 






















CALVERT COUNTY 






















CHESAPEAKE 


2004 


3,328.3 


111 





1 


2 


18 


24 


59 


7 


BEACH 


2005 
% Change 


2, 764 .7 
16.9 


94 
- 15.3 


1 


1 


4 


5 


13 


65 


5 


NORTH BEACH 


2004 


3,739.8 


69 








2 


10 


14 


39 


4 




2005 


3,282.2 


62 








1 


3 


16 


41 


1 




% Change 


- 12.2 


10.1 
















CHARLES COUNTY 


INDIAN HEAD 


2004 


3,506.7 


120 





1 


3 


26 


20 


54 


16 




2005 


3,945.1 


135 


I 





4 


26 


18 


67 


19 




% Change 


* 12.5 


+ 12.5 
















LA PLATA 


2004 


3,395.1 


260 





1 


4 


29 


28 


169 


29 




2005 


4,038.7 


330 





I 


8 


44 


26 


222 


29 




Change 


+ 18.9 


+ 26.9 
















ST. MARY'S COUNTY 


LEONARDTOWN 


2004 


6,454.9 


128 








2 


16 


13 


94 


3 




2005 


7, 107.1 


142 





7 


3 


16 


27 


84 


5 




% Change 


* 10.1 


+ 10.9 
















REGION III 






















ALLEGANY COUNTY 






















BARTON 


2004 


1,255.2 


6 











1 




2 


C 




2005 


418 .4 


2 

















2 







% Change 


- 66.7 


- 66.7 

















107 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 









CRIME 


TOTAL 


MURDER 


RAPE 


ROBBERY 


AGGRAVATED 


BREAKING OR 


LARCENY 


M/V 








RATE 


OFFENSES 








ASSAULT 


ENTERING 


THEFT 


THEFT 


CUMBERLAND 




2004 


6, 113 


5 


1,285 





17 


22 


173 


240 


808 


25 






2005 


6,033 


1 


1,274 


1 


20 


11 


122 


246 


846 


28 






Change 


1 


3 


0.9 
















FROSTBURG 




2004 


4,010 


3 


328 





2 


2 


12 


91 


212 


9 






2005 


4,097 


1 


336 





1 


1 


33 


87 


207 


7 






Change 


2 


2 


+ 2.4 
















LONACONING 




2004 


1,277 


7 


15 





1 








6 


6 


2 






2005 


505 


5 


6 





1 








1 


4 









Change 


- 60 


4 


60.0 
















MIDLAND 




2004 


873 


4 


4 

















4 









2005 



































Change 


- 100 





- 100.0 
















WESTERNPORT 




2004 


3, 163 





65 








1 


21 


18 


21 


4 






2005 


2,569 


1 


53 





1 





10 


15 


26 


1 






Change 


- 18 


8 


18 .5 
















CARROLL COUNTY 


HAMPSTEAD 




2004 


1,987 


4 


107 





2 





10 


16 


78 


1 






2005 


2,052 





112 





2 





5 


10 


88 


7 




% 


Change 


+ 3 


3 


+ 4.7 
















MANCHESTER 




2004 


2,073 


3 


73 





3 





12 


13 


41 


4 






2005 


2,300 


8 


82 





2 





IB 


19 


40 


3 




% 


Change 


+ 11 





+ 12.3 
















*MT. AIRY 




2004 


2,630 


4 


169 








1 


9 


25 


128 


6 






2005 


2,287 


9 


147 








2 


8 


24 


110 


3 




% 


Change 


- 13 





- 13.0 

















NEW WINDSOR 



2004 
2005 



SYKESVILLE 



2004 
2005 



2005 
2005 



% Change 



2004 
2005 



3,408.0 
3, 142.9 



WESTMINSTER 



2004 
2005 



527. 



795 
917 



597 
653 



FREDERICK COUNTY 



2004 
2005 



BURKITTSVILLE 



EMMITSBURG 



2004 
2005 



1,268. 
1,209. 



29 
6.5 



Although Mt . Airy lies in Carroll, Frederick and Howard Counties, for purposes of this report data for the entire city has been 
shown in Carroll County. 



10! 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 



Ki<:i:in-:hiL'K 




.'OO-l 


■1 , 1 / b i 


, ^^,_ 






,, 


n.. 












^005 


J, 607. 1 


2,07.' 




















Change 


13 .6 


1 ;' . -i 
















MIDDLKTOWN 




2004 


1,536.7 


41 





2 





3 


9 


26 


1 






2005 


1,461.8 


39 





1 


2 


2 


7 


26 


1 






Change 


4.9 


4 .9 
















MYERSVILLE 




2004 
2005 

Change 


868.3 
578.9 

- 33.3 


12 
33.3 

























NEW MARKET 




2004 


1,873.5 


8 













.1 










2005 


2,576.1 


11 
























Change 


* 37.5 


♦ 37.5 
















ROSEMONT 




2004 


1,098.9 


3 














1 


1 


1 






2005 

































Change 


- 100.0 


- 100.0 
















THURMONT 




2004 


1,817.3 


108 





p 


1 


15 


18 


70 


2 






2005 


1,820.9 


110 





1 


5 


24 


13 


5:> 


= 






Change 


0.2 


t 1.9 
















WALKERSVILLE 




2004 


866.7 


45 





1 


1 


5 


9 


25 


4 






2605 


1,040.1 


54 





1 





8 


12 


32 


1 






Change 


+ 20.0 


* 20.0 
















WOODSBORO 




2004 


1,300.2 


11 











2 


2 


5 








2005 


2,364.1 


20 











2 


2 


■-5 


1 






Change 


. 81.8 


. 81. 8 
















GARRETT COIINTY 


ACCIDENT 




2004 


283.3 


1 

















1 


c 






2005 


1,133.1 


4 














1 




c 




% 


Change 


+ 300.0 


+ 300.0 
















DEER PARK 




2004 


1,234.6 


5 














3 


2 








2005 


987.7 


4 














1 








% 


Change 


- 20.0 


20. 
















FRIENDSVILLE 




2004 


927.6 


5 











1 


1 


3 









2005 


1,669.8 


9 











1 


4 


4 







% 


Change 


+ 80.0 


+ 80.0 
















GRANTSVILLE 




2004 


1,311.5 


g 











2 


2 


^ 


rj 






2005 


1,973.7 


12 











3 


3 


£ 






% 


Change 


■ + 50.5 


+ 50. 
















KITZMILLER 




2004 


1,986.8 


6 











2 


2 


2 









2005 


1,986.8 


6 











1 


1 


4 







% 


Change 






















LOCH LYNN 




2004 


1,492 ,5 


7 
















6 





HEIGHTS 


% 


2005 
Change 


852.9 
- 42.9 


4 
- 42.9 
















^ 


1 


MT. LAKE PARK 




2004 


1,601.4 


36 











5 


g 


23 









2005 


1,556.9 


35 











2 


6 


26 






% 


Change 


2.8 


2.8 
















OAKLAND 




2004 


4,608.3 


90 


1 








6 


15 


64 


4 






2005 


4,437.6 


86 











6 


11 


67 


2 




% 


Change 


3.7 


4 .4 
















WASHINGTON COUNTY 


BOONSBORO 




2004 


1,570.1 


45 





1 





3 


5 


31 


4 






2005 


1,526.7 


46 





2 





• 1 


9 


33 


1 




% 


Change 


2.6 


2.2 

















109 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 









CRIME 


TOTAL 


MURDER 


RAPE 


ROBBERY 


AGGRAVATED 


BREAKING OR 


LARCENY 


M/V 








RATE 


OFFENSES 








ASSAULT 


ENTERING 


THEFT 


THEFT 


CLEAR SPRING 




2004 


5,714.3 


26 











2 


6 


14 


4 






2005 


3,076.9 


14 








1 


1 


3 




1 






Change 


- 46.2 


- 46.2 
















FUNKSTOWN 




2004 


2,441.5 


24 











6 


8 


6 


4 






2005 


1,932.9 


19 








1 


3 


3 


10 


2 






Change 


^ 20.8 


- 20.8 
















HAGERSTOWN 




2004 


4, 795.8 


1,788 


3 


4 


63 


184 


342 


1,065 


127 






2005 


4,743.3 


1,794 


2 


4 


84 


191 


332 


1,044 


137 






Change 


1.1 


+ 0.3 
















HANCOCK 




2004 


3,150.5 


54 








2 


9 


8 


30 


5 






2005 


5,096.5 


88 








1 


14 


23 


47 


3 






Change 


-I- 61.8 


- 63.0 
















KEEDYSVILLE 




2004 


1,452.3 


7 














5 


2 









2005 


1, 244 .8 


6 














2 


■ 4 









Change 


- 14.3 


- 14.3 
















SHARPSBURG 




2004 


1,881.3 


13 











1 


2 


9 


1 






2005 


1, 302.5 


9 








1 





3 


5 









Change 


- 30.8 


- 30.8 
















SMITHSBURG 




2004 


2,025.2 


53 











8 


6 


37 


2 






2005 


2,034.9 


56 


■ 


1 





7 


10 


37 


1 






Change 


0.5 


+ 5.7 
















WILLIAMSPORT 




2004 


3,573.3 


69 








1 


16 


16 


31 


5 






2005 


4,219.8 


86 








3 


17 


15 


45 


6 






Change 


+ 18.1 


+ 24.6 
















REGION IV 
























MONTGOMERY COUNTY 
























TOWN OF CHEVY 




2004 


880.4 


24 








1 





7 


16 





CHASE 




2005 
Change 


1,870.9 
•f 112.5 


51 
+ 112.5 








1 





^ 


38 


4 


CHEVY CHASE 




2004 


1,045.0 


29 














7 


19 


3 


VILLAGE 




2005 
Change 


1,824.0 
+ 74.5 


51 
+ 75.9 








1 


1 


10 


37 


2 


GAITHERSBURG 




2004 


3,713.0 


2,149 


3 


10 


76 


89 


251 


1,537 


183 






2005 


4, 166.9 


2,439 





16 


102 


101 


311 


1,753 


156 






Change 


+ 12.2 


+ 13.5 
















GARRETT PARK 




2004 


981.5 


9 








1 


Q 


3 


5 









2005 


872.4 


8 















6 


2 






Change 


- 11.1 


^ 11.1 
















KENSINGTON 




2004 


4,217.8 


79 





2 


3 


2 


19 


50 


3 






2005 


4,111.1 


77 








9 


3 


12 


46 


7 






Change 


2.5 


2.5 
















POOLESVILLE 




2004 


2,318.2 


95 











5 


13 


74 


3 






2005 


3, 172.3 


130 








4 


3 


15 


104 


4 






Change 


-f 36.8 


f 36.8 
















ROCKVILLE 




2004 


3,435.6 


1,823 





6 


40 


65 


258 


1,324 


130 






2005 


3,081.6 


1,773 


2 


10 


66 


69 


263 


1, 190 


173 






Change 


- 10.3 


2 .7 
















SOMERSET 




2004 


1, 334 .5 


15 














2 


13 









2005 


800.7 


9 


1 











2 


6 









Change 


- 40.0 


- 40.0 

















110 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 









■KIM1-: 


TOTAL 


MURDER 


RAPE 


ROBBERY 


tC'Jl'AVATKD 


Hi'i.AK;.'j; '; 


1JaHCI:IIY 


M/V 








i;A'ir 


i ii'Ki-:rjsi:: 








/■: .;■.<•: ■'. 




THV.yi 


THEFT 


TAKOMA I'AKK 


t 


2 0LM 
2005 

Change 


4,953.5 
* 12.7 


878 
+ 11.7 


" 










■■' ' '■' 


■' 


I'KINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY 


BERWYN HEIGHTS 




2004 

2005 

Change 


4 , (. M 1 4 

4,459.6 

4.7 


M-1 
liV 
4 . 9 




1 












BLADENSBUKG 




2004 


15,071.4 


1,203 


7 


2 


/4 


bU 


14 / 


559 


3 4t 






2005 


15,589.0 


1,244 


5 


8 


137 


81 


169 


490 


354 






Change 


t 3.4 


■^ 3.4 
















BOWIE 




2004 


2, 367.3 


1, 190 





q 


44 


61 


15 5 


678 


24 3 






2005 


2,428.9 


1,221 


1 


5 


62 


67 


193 


659 


234 






Change 


2.6 


2.6 
















BRENTWOOD 




2004 


8,364.5 


246 


1 


2 


17 


lb 


6 ! 


96 


5 2 






2005 


5,856,5 


173 


2 


- 


11 


9 


3: 


7 4 


4 4 






Change 


- 30.0 


29.7 
















CAPITOL HGTS . 




2004 


6,734.6 


291 





2 


28 


16 


27 


89 


129 






2005 


6,052.2 


262 


1 


1 


31 


15 


27 


102 


85 






Change 


- 10.1 


10.0 
















CHEVERLY 




2004 


5, 414 .7 


363 


1 


2 


28 


15 


50 


157 


110 






2005 


5,885.0 


395 








34 


14 


46 


181 


120 






Change 


+ 8.7 


+ 8.8 
















COLLEGE PARK 




2004 


6,734.5 


1,721 


4 


6 


51 


36 


251 


1, 107 


266 






2005 


6,620.2 


1,691 





8 


87 


65 


238 


1,042 


251 






Change 


1.7 


1.7 
















COLMAR MANOR 




2004 


7,627.8 


100 





1 


9 


g 


9 


57 


16 






2005 


8, 270. 1 


109 








17 


4 


6 


47 


35 






Change 


+ 8.4 


+ 9.0 
















COTTAGE CITY 




2004 


6,042.6 


71 





1 


5 


1 


10 


38 


16 






2005 


7, 179.1 


85 


3 





4 


6 


8 


42 


22 






Change 


. 18.8 


* 19.7 
















DISTRICT HGTS. 




2004 


5,931.8 


371 





3 


26 


18 


45 


130 


149 






2005 


7,755.4 


492 





2 


36 


14 


49 


170 


221 






Change 


* 30.7 


+ 32.6 
















EAGLE HARBOR 




2004 


9,090.9 


5 














1 


2 


2 






2005 


1,818.2 


1 

















C 


1 






Change 


- 80.0 


- 80.0 
















EDMONSTON 




2004 


13,453.2 


187 








4 


7 


35 


92 


49 






2005 


18,539.7 


259 





1 


5 


8 


30 


160 


55 






Change 


+ 37.8 


+ 38.5 
















FAIRMOUNT HGTS. 




2004 


8,000.8 


134 


2 




7 


16 


16 


40 


52 






2005 


11, 181.7 


176 







15 


14 


20 


75 


49 






Change 


+ 39.8 


+ 31.3 
















FOREST HGTS. 




2004 


6,023.7 


163 







9 


13 


30 


^. 


35 






2005 


7,612.3 


205 


1 




13 


14 


56 


96 


24 






Change 


* 26.4 


+ 25.8 
















GLEN ARDEN 




2004 


4,382.0 


290 


2 




13 


24 


42 


117 


91 






2005 


4,865.5 


322 


2 




21 


25 


46 


123 


103 






Change 


+ 11.0 


+ 11.0 
















GREENBELT 




2004 


7, 060 . 5 


1,574 


3 


10 


110 


58 


152 


834 


4 07 






2005 


6,833.7 


1,527 


2 


13 


140 


92 


129 


837 


314 






Change 


3.2 


3.0 

















111 



MUNICIPALITY CRIME RATES 

CRIME TOTAL MURDER RAPE ROBBERY AGGRAVATED BREAKING OR LARCENY M/V 
RATE OFFENSES ASSAULT ENTERING THEFT THEFT 



HYATTSVILLE 



6,354.6 
6,123.4 



972 
937 



112 
105 



540 

505 



219 

203 



2004 
2005 

% Change 



3,306. 
5,381. 



86 
62.3 



2004 
2005 



195. 
799. 



,291 
, 442 



684 
781 



MORNINGSIDE 



2004 

2005 

Change 



8,290.5 
8,602.9 
+ 3.8 



MT. RAINIER 



2004 
2005 



, 140. 
,768. 



629 
596 



265 
217 



193 
221 



NEW CARROLLTON 



2004 
2005 



031 
985 



471 
425 



362 
290 



NORTH BRENTWOOD 



2004 
2005 



10,661. 
6,183. 



RIVERDALE PARK 



2004 
2005 



6,069. 
7,085. 



402 
472 



205 
207 



104 
121 



SEAT PLEASANT 



2004 7,250. 

2005 12,671. 



369 
645 



129 
260 



145 
166 



UNIVERSITY PARK 



2004 
2005 



92 
31.4 



UPPER MARLBORO 



REGION V 
BALTIMORE CITY 



2004 
2005 



% Change 



7, 941.2 
7, 153 .3 



BALTIMORE CITY 



7,612.9 
7,028.7 



18,287 
55,061 



276 
269 



182 
162 



083 
935 



177 
943 



8, 022 
7, 388 



20, 132 



6,730 
6,232 



ANI^IE ARUNDEL COUNTY 



ANNAPOLIS 



2004 
2005 



6,358.7 
5,792.9 



254 
245 



316 
202 



252 
152 



HARFORD COUNT-! 



2004 
2005 



6, 365.7 
6,714.6 



911 
961 



122 
131 



639 
604 



2004 

2005 

% Change 



596 
602 



HAVRE DE GRACE 



2004 
2005 



756.5 
763.5 



547 
557 



359 
367 



112 



MARYLAND 
ARREST DATA 



ARREST DATA 



The Maryland Uniform Crime Reporting Program requires the submission of 
monthly reports of persons arrested in the state. A record of arrest 
activity for both Part I and Part II crimes are received from state, 
county and municipal law enforcement agencies showing the age, sex and 
race of persons arrested. Traffic arrests, except Driving While 
Intoxicated, are not reported. A total of 308,075 arrests for Part I 
and Part II criminal offenses were reported during 2005. In 2004, 
there were 309,777 arrests which represents a 5 percent decrease. 
Based on 2005 population estimates, there were 5,501.0 arrests per 
100,000 population in Maryland. The arrest rate for 2004 was 5,573.5 
representing a 1 percent arrest rate decrease. 

A person is counted on the monthly arrest report each time they are 
arrested. This means that a person may be arrested several times 
during a given month and would be counted each time. However, a person 
is counted only once each time regardless of the number of crimes or 
charges involved. A juvenile is counted as "arrested" when the 
circumstances are such that, if the juvenile were an adult, an arrest 
would have been counted or when police or other official action is 
taken beyond a mere interview, warning or admonishment. 

Arrest figures do not indicate the number of individuals arrested or 
summoned since, as stated above, one person may be arrested several 
times during the month. However, arrest information is useful in 
measuring the extent of law enforcement activities in a given 
geographic area as well as providing an index for measuring the 
involvement in criminal acts by the age, sex and race of perpetrators. 

During 2005, 15 percent of all reported arrests were for Crime Index 
Offenses, compared to 16 percent in 2004. Analysis of Crime Index 
Arrest Data indicates that larceny-theft comprised the highest 
percentage of all arrests for Crime Index offenses, with 50 percent of 
the total in 2005, down from 51 percent in 2004. The drug abuse, other 
assaults, driving under the influence and disorderly conduct 
categories recorded the highest percentage of arrests for Part II 
offenses. These offenses accounted for 45 percent of the total arrests 
for Part II offenses in 2005. 

5 YEAR TREND 

5 YEAR 
AVERAGE 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 

Juvenile 50,042 50,314 52,231 51,404 47,169 49,094 
Adult 262,437 257,761 257,546 273,155 264,722 259,000 

TOTAL 312,479 308,075 309,777 324,559 311,891 308,094 



114 



VIOLENT C RIME ARRESTS 

violent Crime arrests represented 26 percent of all arrests for Crime 
Index Offenses and 4 percent of total arrests. In 2004, Violent Crime 
arrests represented 25 percent of all arrest for Crime Index offenses 

and 4 percent of total arrests. 

A further evaluation indicates that arrests for robbery and aggravated 
assault represented the highest percentage of the total arrests for 
violent crimes with 30 and 64 percent, respectively. 



PROPERTY CRIME ARRESTS 

Property Crime arrests represented 74 percent of all arrests for Crime 
Index Offenses and 11 percent of the total arrests. In 2004, Property 
Crime arrests represented 75 percent of all arrests for Crime Index 
Offenses and 12 percent of the total arrests. 

The highest percentage of property crime arrests, 67 percent, continues 
to occur in the larceny-theft category. 



GAMBLING ARREST 

A total of 387 gambling arrests were reported during 2005. In 2004, 353 
persons were arrested for Gambling violations resulting in a 10 percent 
increase. 

Arrests for Gambling offenses amounted to less than 1 percent of all 
reported Part I and Part II arrests in 2005. Persons under the age of 
18 made up 21 percent of all Gambling arrests in 2005, compared to 13 
percent in 2004 . 

5 YEAR TREND 

5 YEAR 
AVERAGE 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 



Bookmaking 


3 





3 


4 


4 


3 


Numbers 


4 


1 


8 





3 


7 


Other 


319 


386 


342 


398 


249 


218 


Total 


326 


387 


353 


402 


256 


228 



DRUG ABUSE VIOLATION ARRESTS 

Information pertaining to drug abuse violation arrests is collected 
according to specific drug categories and whether the arrest was for 
sale or manufacture or possession of a specific drug. During 2005, a 
total of 53,047 arrests for drug abuse law violations were reported 
compared to 51,971 drug abuse law violation arrests in 2004, resulting 
in a 2 percent increase. 

115 



Evaluation of the reported data discloses that 32 percent of all persons 
arrested for drug abuse violations were under 21 years of age and 15 
percent were under 18 years of age in 2005, compared to 32 and 16 
percent respectively in 2004. 

Analysis of individual categories showed that the highest percentage of 
arrests, which involved opium or cocaine and derivatives, was 55 percent 
in 2005 and 58 percent in 2004. Drug abuse arrests, for marijuana was 
increased to 42 percent in 2005 from 39 percent in 2004. Of the total 
drug abuse arrests 75 percent were for possession while 25 percent were 
for sale or manufacture in 2005, compared to 71 and 29 percent 
respectively in 2004. 

Possession of marijuana increased to 38 percent of the total drug abuse 
arrests in 2005, from 35 percent in 2004. Possession of opium or 
cocaine and derivatives represented 36 percent of the total drug abuse 
arrests in 2005, an increase from 35 percent in 2004. Arrests for sale 
or manufacture of marijuana amounted to . 4 percent of the total drug 
abuse arrests in 2005. Sale or manufacture of opium or cocaine and 
derivatives decreased to 19 percent of the total drug abuse arrests in 
■2005, as compared to 23 percent in 2004. 

To aid in the study of drug arrests a chart by county is provided. 



5 YEAR TREND 





5 YEAR 














AVERAGE 


2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 


Total 


52,782 


53,047 


51,971 


54,560 


51,623 


52,711 


Sales /Manu- 


14,795 


13,189 


14,920 


16,350 


13,919 


15,596 


facture 














Opium/ 


12,044 


10,220 


12,015 


13,358 


11,510 


13, 117 


cocaine 














Marijuana 


1,979 


2, 058 


2,088 


2,152 


1,752 


1, 845 


Synthetic 


641 


801 


696 


700 


529 


477 


Other 


131 


110 


121 


140 


128 


157 


Possession 


37,988 


39,858 


37,051 


38,210 


37,704 


37,115 


Opium/ 


19, 188 


19,061 


18,277 


19,592 


20,269 


18,739 


Cocaine 














Marijuana 


18,086 


20,049 


18,130 


17,838 


16,744 


17,668 


Synthetic 


265 


261 


228 


334 


254 


248 


Other 


449 


487 


416 


446 


437 


460 ■ 



116 



01 



ITJ 
V V 



o :3.x 

T3 

0) o 2 

4J J3 ^ 



■w o 



f-l (1) 



UJ VC CTv 



^ VD (M 



117 



0-H 



o 



o 

-H 4) 



'z c!^ 






" n 
Id 






>H M* in 



CM rH LTl 



118 



cri in ^ 



rH CN CTi 



(N CT\ (M 



ro (Tv rvi 



t: 




n) 




S 


0) 




M 






c 


(D 






(T3 





OT 


W 



119 



01° 01 
•" m 3 

^ p 





o mT] 




















>1 




W 




nj 




C 




(0 




3 




■n 




•H 




^ 




nJ 


s 


S 


^o 








'Zri 




^ 


•il 




V3 


O 


s| 




ss 


C/3 


a> 


u 


li 


^ 


< 


OX) 


s 




L. 
Q 










cr\ 00 (N 



■<;»• CM in 
U3 U3 m 



CM Lfi in 
r- 1X1 

VD 1^ CN 



120 






un in M 



CTi CTi tH 



en CN 



121 



-H (I) c 
O 3.9 

u o3 



© u 



s? 









CN CM VD 






CN (Tl CM 



0) 


"* 


in 


QJ 


en 


o 


o 


en 


c 


o 


o 


C 


2 


CN 


(N 


m 



m <D 
4-1 en 



122 






ARRESTS 



CLASSIFICATION 
OF OFFENSES 



BLACK AJ-IEPIC/U; 

ni:ji;..:i 



MURDER £. NGN NEGLIGENT 
MANSLAUGHTER 

MANSLAUGHTER BY NEGLIGENCE 

FORCIBLE RAPE 

ROBBERY 

FELONIOUS ASSAULT 

BREAKING OR ENTERING 

LARCENY -THEFT 

MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 

OTHER ASSAULTS 

ARSON 

FORGERY & COUNTERFEITING 

FRAUD 

EMBEZZLEMENT 

STOLEN PROPERTY; BUYING, 
RECEIVING, POSSESSING 



WEAPONS; CARRYING, 
POSSESSING, ETC. 

PROSTITUTION & COMMERCIALIZED 
VICE 

SEX OFFENSES (EXCEPT FORCIBLE 
RAPE, PROSTITUTION & VICE) 

DRUG ABUSE VIOLATIONS 

GAMBLING 

OFFENSES AGAINST FAMILY 
AND CHILDREN 

DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE 

LIQUOR LAWS 

DISORDERLY CONDUCT 

VAGRANCY 

ALL OTHER OFFENSES (EXCEPT 
TRAFFIC) 

SUSPICION 



CURFEW & LOITERING 
LAW VIOLATIONS 



GRAND TOTAL 



310 




23 


54 


274 





5 


16 




3 


16 


3 








415 




3 


184 


228 





6 


3,300 




283 


760 


2,811 


2 


10 


6, 102 


1 


656 


3,481 


4,212 


9 


56 


6,153 




935 


3,720 


3,322 


13 


33 


15,172 


8 


227 


11,331 


11, 850 


23 


195 


3, 892 




527 


1,239 


3,158 


5 


17 


23,690 


9 


387 


13,898 


18,919 


46 


214 


485 




87 


315 


254 





3 


769 




364 


529 


596 


2 


6 


1, 576 


1 


580 


2,032 


1,110 





14 


177 




192 


170 


196 





3 


237 




40 


102 


173 





2 


3, 779 




800 


2, 561 


1, 982 


4 


32 


4,061 




434 


1,539 


2,911 


9 


36 



44 


208 




375 


1 


829 


18 


966 


4 


601 


5 


161 




111 


93 


629 




366 




439 



9 


839 




12 




537 


4 


572 


1 


307 


1 


701 




15 


2 


533 




83 




47 



17 


862 




49 


1 


137 


18 


986 


4 


539 


3 


124 




51 



201 
68 



34 


898 




336 


1 


217 


4 


190 


1 


281 


3 


704 




72 


66 


396 




248 




417 




317 


166 


,703 




5 

22 
5 
8 
1 

132 






239 
2 

7 

340 

83 

26 

2 

754 



1 



123 



ARRESTS 



CLASSIFICATION 
OF OFFENSES 



UNDER 10 10-12 



AGE 
16 17 JUVENILE 
TOTAL 



MURDER i NON NEGLIGENT 
MANSLAUGHTER 



MANSLAUGHTER 
BY NEGLIGENCE 



FORCIBLE RAPE 





7 


ROBBERY 


3 


57 


FELONIOUS ASSAULT 


39 


216 


BREAKING OR ENTERING 


25 


292 


LARCENY -THEFT 


56 


655 


MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 


2 


48 


OTHER ASSAULTS 


143 


1,107 


ARSON 


20 


68 


FORGERY £< COUNTERFEITING 


1 




FRAUD 







EMBEZZLEMENT 







STOLEN PROPERTY; BUYING, 







RECEIVING, POSSESSING 






VANDALISM 


54 


364 


WEAPONS; CARRYING, 


14 


135 


POSSESSING, ETC. 







PROSTITUTION & 
COMMERCIALIZED VICE 



SEX OFFENSES (EXCEPT 
PROSTITUTION & VICE 



DRUG ABUSE VIOLATIONS 


6 


108 


GAMBLING 





1 


OFFENSES AGAINST 
FAMILY AND CHILDREN 





5 



DRIVING UNDER THE 
INFLUENCE 

LIQUOR LAWS 

DISORDERLY CONDUCT 

VAGRANCY 

ALL OTHER OFFENSES 
(EXCEPT TRAFFIC) 

SUSPICION 

CURFEW Sc LOITERING 
LAW VIOLATIONS 



13 151 



13 14 10 11 

303 332 331 302 

533 383 317 349 

664 559 514 423 

1,880 1,515 1,548 1,619 

395 472 457 453 

2,650 1,859 1,745 1,589 

125 65 42 29 

7 14 23 24 

15 13 18 34 
11 28 
3 10 13 6 

758 452 410 440 

464 344 331 365 

7 4 13 15 

107 40 43 50 

950 1,509 2,188 2,973 

16 16 21 26 
20 5 7 20 

2 6 73 212 

101 201 381 615 

676 558 595 544 

13 2 

1,668 1,697 1,966 2,065 

9 11 15 32 

70 104 131 170 

216 222 219 155 





55 


23 


1 


328 


396 


1 


837 


374 


2 


477 


389 


7 


273 


1, 058 


1 


827 


272 


9 


093 


943 




349 


19 




70 


31 




82 


63 




40 


34 




33 


13 


2 


478 


213 


1 


653 


292 



23 12 22 15 13 
229 189 136 118 80 
303 270 251 295 269 
351 290 259 211 194 
955 838 715 696 590 
209 177 152 127 98 
965 1,030 1,039 1,064 953 

12 10 6 6 7 

33 37 48 42 26 

83 101 98 118 107 

24 28 17 17 12 
9 15 10 18 6 

192 162 127 113 104 

267 239 238 169 159 



39 19 24 27 40 53 61 

317 34 35 36 40 37 38 

7,734 3,476 3,119 2,818 2,475 2,280 2,023 



80 


38 


29 


26 


23 


23 


16 


57 


23 


34 


35 


43 


51 


59 



649 



790 1,154 1,144 1,154 



812 625 206 168 112 

296 267 315 240 216 

3 4 3 4 3 

7,900 3,842 4,758 4,866 4,560 4,572 4,170 



1,305 


892 


2,537 


293 


7 


8 



68 


34 


33 


33 


31 


21 


16 


486 





















GRAND TOTAL 



465 3,781 11,656 10,418 11,428 12,566 50,314 13,284 13,475 12,954 12,033 11,625 10,510 



124 



ARRESTS 



CLASSIFICATION 
OF OFFENSES 



MURDER S, NGN NEGLIGEN'I 
MANSLAUGHTER 



MANSLAUGHTER BY 
NEGLIGENCE 



FORCIBLE RAPE 


16 


46 


40 


53 


43 


24 


19 




3 


4 


363 


418 


ROBBERY 


94 


282 


185 


216 


180 


95 


36 




6 


9 


2,255 


3,583 


FELONIOUS ASSAULT 


217 


891 


700 


732 


722 


444 


217 


119 


52 


65 


5, 921 


7,758 


BREAKING OR ENTERING 


179 


688 


475 


533 


545 


303 


121 




8 


12 


4,611 


7,088 


LARCENY -THEFT 


564 


2, 280 


1, 868 


2, 140 


2, 021 


1,330 


610 


263 


113 


85 


16, 126 


23,399 


MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 


103 


388 


265 


299 


274 


125 


68 




12 


7 


2,592 


4,419 


OTHER ASSAULTS 


934 


3,874 


3, 124 


3, 195 


3, 064 


2,016 


961 


413 


228 


181 


23,984 


33,077 


ARSON 


6 


41 


26 


28 


27 


15 


13 




3 





223 


572 


FORGERY & COUNTERFEITING 


29 


175 


161 


154 


148 


104 


41 




5 


5 


1,063 


1,133 


FRAUD 


106 


506 


497 


510 


428 


217 


135 




22 


32 


3,074 


3,156 


EMBEZZLEMENT 


16 


34 


34 


37 


40 


18 


9 


6 





3 


329 


369 


STOLEN PROPERTY; BUYING, 


• 9 


44 


27 


25 


29 


20 


11 


6 


1 


1 


244 


277 


RECEIVING, POSSESSING 


























VANDALISM 


85 


299 


179 


178 


209 


124 


63 


26 


14 


13 


2,101 


4,579 


WEAPONS; CARRYING, 


127 


498 


220 


205 


163 


120 


78 


30 


19 


18 


2, 842 


4,495 


POSSESSING, ETC. 



























PROSTITUTION & 
; COMMERCIALIZED VICE 

SEX OFFENSES (EXCEPT 
FORCIBLE RAPE, 
PROSTITUTION & VICE) 

DRUG ABUSE VIOLATIONS 

GAMBLING 

OFFENSES AGAINST FAMILY 
AND CHILDREN 

DRIVING UNDER THE 
INFLUENCE 



762 6,558 4,435 4,863 5,203 3,499 1,804 

17 55 25 15 16 10 6 

74 330 403 477 382 232 95 

134 4,129 2,789 2,590 2,652 2,102 1,236 



995 1,312 



716 


202 


80 


45,313 


53,047 


3 


1 


4 


307 


387 


35 


18 


18 


2,309 


2,366 



251 23,243 23,538 



LIQUOR LAWS 
DISORDERLY CONDUCT 
VAGRANCY 



95 


325 


218 


254 


303 


248 


157 


84 


35 


69 


4,603 


5,908 


210 


623 


396 


444 


462 


287 


146 


72 


33 


25 


4,325 


6,862 


4 


17 


12 


21 


20 


10 


6 


3 





1 


119 


126 



ALL OTHER OFFENSES 
EXCEPT TRAFFIC) 



16,142 12,760 14,448 14,772 10,049 4,980 2,261 



914 1,108 108,262 116,162 



CURFEW & LOITERING 
LAW VIOLATIONS 



2 


67 


26 


38 


26 


22 


12 


4 


4 


2 


381 


449 



































486 



GRAND TOTAL 



38,734 29,368 31,988 32,157 21,700 10,970 4,928 2,066 2,027 257,761 308,075 



125 



X CO 



126 



§1 

oi < 






J o 



127 



O K 



O O rH 



U3 U3 O 



^ O O 



m o u) 
1/1 •5}' I 



1X1 [^ o 



IN CTl (N 



128 



rH (N CM 



in [^ iji 



ii 



Ln kD a\ 
iH in i-i 

fN CM + 



1X> U) 1/1 

rr in CN 

r^ in 1 



cr\ U3 r- 



in 00 o 



fN t^ o 



►J O 



O (N t^ 



[^ O U3 






129 



H < 
O 






►4 H 



J CO 

< w 

H a 

o Oi 



2 H 
O 2 



LTl Ln 



^ in o 

(N CM 



^O o 

rH CN 



130 



in in o * o o 



(N (N 

m + 



m 00 m 



a\ 00 
•H ir\ 

(N tN 



r~ [^ o 



a\ r~ « o o 



J O 



O T]< o 



131 



< 



g§ 



< W 

H Pi 

O K 

H < 



rH O O 



O O O 



O O O 



132 



o o O 



o o O 



H 

Di t«i 
O U 



a o 

H Oi 

w a, 



133 









OO U5 IT) 

tN rH I 

(N OJ 



rH m * U) 



H O 
2 H 



►^1 J 

M O 

CJ O. 
U 

u w 

■ H 

(1. < 

W H 

2 W 



134 



J o 



rN o o 



r- m tii< 



U) o in 



O O ♦ rH o 



135 



ON CT\ O 



CN t^ O 






H 
< U 

o a 

H < 



O 00 LTl 



u u 

' < 

a. H 

s D 



136 



O CO o 



§3 



J O 



LTI CTl tN ♦ U) 



(Tl CTl O ♦ O U) 



.-( U3 in 






137 



H < 

o 



CTi tN in 



H 
1-3 m 
< U 

o a 



u u 
' < 

ft H 



O U 
U M 

H O 



en H 



138 



H 

^; hi 

w u 






00 r- 

tN (N 



00 r- ID 



o « o 



a^ o [^ 



(N o o 



139 



VD O 1^ 



I 



Eh < 

o 



LD «) (N 



rf r-l \D 






CN l/l O 

(TV m (N 

CM CN I 



fH 0\ ■tf 



H a 
o a; 



crv in [^ 



■* m w 



140 



(^ r~ o 



LTi <N r^ 



CO « cr\ 



141 






[^ O rH 



u) tN in 



CN in o 



H 1-3 



CO CN (N 
(N CM 



H 
►J w 

O A 



vD vo r- 



^ in M 



^ in Cd 



2 CQ 



>< 


w 


H 


J 


§ 


^ 


O 


o 


o 


H 


H 


w 


U 


u 


CO 




K 


J 


w 


o 



142 



m >x> ON 



^D c^ •"^ 






o vo 
(N in 

(N (M 



ir\ <D t-t 



CN VD ^ 



143 



P Q 



►J cn 

< w 

H a: 

o K 



Eh H 

a o 



144 



o o 



O tN (N 



CN rH O 



M- o + o o 



a\ r- o 



U tJ 



o o « o o 



cr\ oo >i) 



r- «j' « o o 



J O 



U3 [^ [^ 



145 



H < 
O 



o •^ U-) 






P Q 



< w 
o a 



w < 

2 PQ 



146 



2 J 

o o 



►J o 
0) a< 



147 



a\ 00 



in if) 



[^ (.0 (N 



<N (N o 






P Q 



H 
►:) CO 
< w 

O a: 



O 00 (N 



o o U 



o o O 



■^ tN ■^ 



»XI [^ ON 



o o O 



^ in w 
o o O 



:^ CTv in 



r~ IX) in 



o o O 



U 
en ci. 



O ffi 

3 W 



148 



II 



149 



►J 


tn 


< 


u 




« 




Oi 


E-i 


< 



O H 

W W 

H U 

m M 

u o 
O 



in CX3 



o o\ 
in CO 
o o 



O O (^ 



150 



ii 

Is 



iJ O 

CO (ii 



U-| rH O 



•<f o o\ « (N n 

<N CD n * U) o 

m (N + * r^ o 



rH o o 



r^ in fN 



(N m 



00 o\ o 

(N •^ ro 

[^ CN + 



rH o cri 



.H r^ .H 



oj in o 



151 



o cr\ 
in 00 
o o 



a\ [~- LTi 



r^ o\ CN 



Tji in [d 

o o O 

o o a 

CM (N Kt 



152 



1 H 

2 m 



J o 



C- CM ♦ O O 



rH U) 1^ 



r- o 

r-l 00 

in M3 



153 






H 1^ 






(N r~ [^ 



154 



KO r-l 

o r~ 

(M <N 



r~ r- .H 
o in 1 
in "T 



o 00 tn 



(J\ o 



o o (N 



in 1^ in 



o <* t^ 



J O 

en a 



o o * o o 



<N r~ in 
(N in + 



155 



o 



LD tN in 



P Q 






'S- LTl M 



156 



O M 






in in 
CD n 



[^ cr> in 



iH [^ CTi * ^ in 

m n + * U5 n 

■* in « iH (N 



in 00 cr> 



157 



H < 
O 



o r- VD 
'J' in 



O ^ (N 



(N (N c^ 

a\ a\ ^ 

rH m 1 



O Pi 

H < 



H 
O O 
U H 



w o 



o o O 
002 

(N OJ rij 



^ in M 
000 
002 

CM oj ict 



158 



a < 



O (N O 



m 1/1 (N * (N (N 



U5 '^ CM 



159 



X m 
H < 
O 



[^ ON 

(N (N 



H 1^ 






Eh Oi 
O K 

H < 



<^ (N * U) 



rf m M 



1^ 



►3 U 

iJ M 

O ►J 

K o 



u w 



160 






m fN 



161 



I 



n 00 r- 



O Di 
H < 



o m o 



162 



Ci < 






a\ CO a\ 



tN o o 



in ■5)' r~ 



f\j •^ in 



CT\ vo OJ 

^ en m 



in o o « o o 



163 



< a 
o Oi 



r- 00 U3 



Pu ft, 



CTv r- (Ti 



(N (N r- 



U) 1^ > 



in t^ (M 



•q< in w 
o o O 
002 
(N IN <; 



164 



vo in r- 



CN o o « rsi o 



m 1^ ♦ r~ VD 



<M rH m 



LTi r- r- 



J O 



00*00 



in t^ o 



165 



X CO 
H < 
O 






H 
►J W 
< U3 

o a 



0\ O 1X1 



Q 


H 


Cj 






U 




u 








J 


ft! 


o 




Cb 








u 




H 



^ 1/1 W 

o o O 
o o ;z 



166 



J o 



.H [- U) 



167 



X CO 



in 

■J H 



H 
►J U) 
< U 

o a: 

H < 



(N m U) 



L/l VJ3 t^ 






(N CM O 



rH CTN O 



O [^ 



CN 0\ TJ" 



a\ o (J\ 



■3> Ln la 
o o O 
o o 2 



O 

H 



w w 

< K 



?s 



161 



gs 



u) LTi r^ 



Ln o o 



O CTi U3 



vD r- o 



o (N in 



169 



X w 
H < 
O 



m cr> t^ 

o o oi 



(Ti (Ti o 

r^ (N rH 



OO U) .H 

r^ [^ rH 

00 <T\ + 



J H 


« 


r- 


^ 


^^ 


* 


r- 




O Q 
H 3 






^ 


* 


^ 




f^ 


* 


^ 


„ 


h5 W 




o 


(M 


< W 


« 


■# 


ON 


H a 








o a 




in 


in 


Eh < 


« 







CN o in 



rH m o 
in U3 oj 
in U) + 



(N o in 



O K 





O 


>< 


H 


w 


W 


2 


u 






O 


►J 




o 


z 


D< 


o 




£ 


W 




H 


a. 


< 


w 


H 


2 


W 



170 



gs 



in Ln 



171 



iH r- C7\ 



CM c^ cri 






is 



O K 



172 



11 



173 






O K 

H < 



o o O 



VD tN CTl 



o\ in [^ 



o o O 



174 



tN r- fN 



o o O 



in rH iH 



o o O 



J o 



115 






9 Q 



O (N 



^ \D vr 



■<a< o in 



176 



s§ 



177 









J CO 

< W 

o K 

H < 



^ in ca 



> J 



178 



- Q 



S < 

O H 



179 



H 1^ 



VD en o 



B9 




n 


<N 


H 




'^ 


U1 


H^ W 




in 


o 


< a 




U) 




H « 








o a; 








H < 









VD -S" (^ 

m o + 

CTl o 






O U 



180 



11 



Tj" Tf tri * C7\ ^ o 



o ■<i" o * on 

-H vo tT « 



r- ^ VD 



<N (N 









1^ o c\ 



(N CJ\ U) 






r^ t-~ r- 



r- r~ r~ 



181 






b 5 






, 


H >^ 




o 


o 


























CO 




a\ 


[^ 


^ H 






>s> 


^^ 




(T, 




g§ 






























H 




00 


<-t 


J m 








< u 






a\ 


H U 








o ct: 




o 




H < 




o 


ON 



o o O 
o o 2 

<N <N < 



,}. LTl M 

O O O 

o o 2 



b: < 

O H 



182 



§i 






ii 



^:i O 
H a: 

W ft 






^ o 

(N (M 






183 



as CO 
H < 
o 






< W 

H K 

O K 

H < 



a o 
u 



(N U3 (N 



2 < 



184 



r- o o 



OJ o o 



185 



vD in 



o a 

H < 



u) a. 



a- a 



186 



187 






•»!• C~- Ul 

(N O 






O U3 



<Tl <D UJ 



O VO VD 



c\ cr\ 1J3 



O 






< W 

H « 

O a 

H < 



in VD 



CTN •<}i t^ 



M O 



2 J 
1^ 

u o 

H 

a; w 
o u 

S t-i 



188 






in o o 



[^ c^ o 
a\ m (N 



(N (N in 



O CN VD 



o •5i< r^ 



189 






O Dti 
H < 



u 

w 

Q O 

O J 
b. O 



190 






\D iri 
1X1 o\ 

in ui 



191 



O Pi 



in m u) 



VD r~ Ln 
ON o 



^ o t^ 

•51< o ^ 

CN OJ I 



o CO <o 



(Ti CN) [^ 



iH 00 O 

00 + 
o o 



o in OJ 

O CTi 

U) in 



H H 

P H 
O 

u w 
u 

Q M 

<; o 

s a 

o 

X w 

> H 

a < 

W H 

S W 



192 



(N o (N ♦ tN cr\ 



o r^ o 



-H O 



o in * ^D in 



193 









O K 



U M 

I H 

w w 

S CO 



194 



M O 

u m 

D. > 

s o 



m « o o 



< O 






iH O 



U) cr\ rH 



U) CM VC 






o a\ * o o 



J O 



195 






SB 



CTN O ro + CN LTl 



< w 
o a 



rs u) <N 
in in + 

(N (N 






H a: 



196 






197 



LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

OFFICERS 

KILLED AND 

ASSAULTED 



LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS KILLED 



One law enforcement officers died in the line of duty in Maryland 
during 2005. The following summary is based on information provided 
by their agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Federal 
Bureau of Investigation conducts in-depth investigation of these 
tragic incidents in which law enforcement officers have made the 
supreme sacrifice in the performance of their duties. 



June 2005 

A 41 year old officer of the Prince George's County Police Department 
died as a result of being shot after a car chase. The fifteen year 
veteran along with other officers stopped a vehicle after it tried 
to elude officers. After the vehicle stopped the three occupants 
fled. During the foot chase one suspect fired on the officer killing 
him. All three suspects were arrested. 



201 



•' 



LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ASSAULTED 



The following information is based on a detailed monthly collection 
of data in the Uniform Crime Reporting System regarding the problem 
of assaults on local, county and state law enforcement officers. 
The large number of reported assaults on sworn officers is in part 
due to a prevalent attitude of disrespect for law enforcement in 
certain elements of our society. 

A total of 4,166 law enforcement officers in Maryland were victims 
of assault in the line of duty during 2005, compared to 3,868 
assaults during 2004 resulting in an 8 percent increase. 

The rate of assaults on law enforcement officers for the state was 
28 assaults per every 100 sworn officers in 2005. In 2004 the rate 
of assaults on law enforcement officers was 26 assaults per every 
100 sworn officers. 

Physical force was used in 85 percent of all assaults on police 
officers . 

The greatest number of assaults, 29 percent, occurred while officers 
were responding to disturbance calls (family disputes, man with a 
gun, etc.), 29 percent of assaults on police officers occurred 
between 10:00 P.M. and 2:00 A.-M. 

A total of 3,980 assaults on law enforcement officers were cleared 
during 2005 amounting to a 96 percent clearance rate. 







INJURY 


VS NON- 


INJURY 








5 YEAR 


2005 


2004 


2003 


2002 


2001 




AVERAGE 












No Personal 
Injury 


3,289 


3,405 


3,146 


3,200 


3,321 


3,375 


Personal 
Injury 


662 


761 


722 


542 


714 


572 


Total 


3,952 


4,166 


3, 868 


3,742 


4,035 


3,947 


Weapons 


Firearm 


80 


84 


54 


96 


76 


90 


Knife 


48 


44 


46 


45 


50 


54 


Other 


484 


494 


501 


470 


516 


439 


Physical 
Force 


3,340 


3,544 


3,267 


3,131 


3,393 


3,364 


Total 


3,952 


4,166 


3,868 


3,742 


4,035 


3,947 



203 



< 

y 
o 

Qh 



H 
O 

o 


Ln 


in 


o 


(J\ 


\D 


O 


rH 


>^ 


"^ 


Lil 


*X) 


CO 


r-i 


r- 


KD 


"^ 


in 


r- 


iH 


LD 


CN 


^ 


Ch 


"^ 


(N 


n 










CN 


- 





















^ 


n 


n 


rH 


o 


in 


O 


U) 


o 


iH 


VX) 


CD 


CN 












H PQ 

Z H 

» Pi 

U H 

« W 

W H 

CU Q 



n 


iH 


CN 


r^ 


rH 


r- 


VD 


VX) 


00 


cn 


o 


O 


n 


in 


rH 


CN 


LD 


CO 


CN 


rn 


f^ 


in 


en 


'^ 


m 


m 











LD 


[^ 


cx) 


Ln 


CN 


m 


in 


r-i 


'^ 


o 


^ 


o 


U) 


o 


LT) 


o 


m 


ro 


ro 




rH 



O 


O 


O 


VD 


r^ 


o 


m 


cn 


CO 


^^ 


CN 


r-\ 


m 


r- 


o 


cn 


in 


00 


^ 


"^ 


CN 


LD 


cn 


^ 


ro 


CN 





















id 









































m 




CO 




■H 
















4-J 




a 




U 
















CO 







cn CO 


■H 




CO 












(U 




-p 


a ^ 


a. 




CO 






CO 






u 




C/3 


•H (U 


CO 




(U 






CO 






u 






-u c 


p 




!-l 






OJ 






< 




ta 


^ 


U) 




01 






u 




CO 








CO 









TS 




U) 




rH 


u 




cn 


Q,-H 


U-l 




h 


0) 









rH 


Q) 




i-i 


CO !h 







a, 


U) 




iH 




rd 


x: 




■H 


C D. 








c 


iH 


p. 




U 


u 




:3 


03 


c 




C 


03 


Q) 








O 




CO 


^ M-l 







-H 


!h 


T3 


c 




(D 






!h 


H 


-H 






(D 


Jh 


■H 




U 


cn 




13 




JJ 




CO 


Q 









C 


C 


Sh 


cu 


- >. 


03 




Q) 




CO 


CO 




03 


•H 


(U 




cnxi 


Dl 




■H 


>i 


•H 


0) 




XI 


4J 


s: 


u 


C 


■H 


CO 


!h 


:—\ 


Q 


■H 




;-i 


a 


i-> 


•rH 


-H JJ 


4J 


c 


03 


i-H 




IH 


x: 


P 


E 


o 


M-l 


rH CO 


CO 





rH 


03 


rH 


Q) 


CO 


4-) 


(D 




UH 


Ti P 


0) 


CO 


D1 


0-) 


•H 


Xi 


:3 


CO 


4J 


1 — 1 


03 


C U 


> 


u 


U 


c 


> 


Xi 


i 


■H 


U 


rH 


Sh 


03 


c 


0) 





0) 


■H 





Q 


< 


< 


H 


K ^ 


M 


&4 


m 


s 


u 


D^ 


<: 



204 



rH 


rH 


\o 


r-{ 


CN 


^ 


UD 


CO 


in 


CN 


rH 


in 


U3 


CO 


cn 


m 




^ 


'^r 


in 


rH 


^ 


^ 


m 


r-l 


00 


c- 


rH 


m 


ro 


Ul 


PO 


^ 


CT\ 


vo 


CN 


S 


2 


< 


04 



< Q 
u 

U [^ 

u < 

M W 

o u 






oooooooo 



Q 








U 






;J 


H 






a u 


^ 






w u 


U) 
< 






>^ O 

ft 


C/3 








(Z3 








< 




§ 


ft: 2 


C/5 




0* 


w o 


qS 




g 




ti 




s 


O W 


u 




II. 




NM 




o 




b 




u 


U 


C£< 




D. 


Cb 


o 






1 


H 








Z 








U 






o: 


S 






Cxj 






u 






ft: 


ec 






pL, 


o 






ii. 








^ 




ft: 




ti 






^ 




w 
u c 


3 


< 












J c 









< c 


n 






s- 


( 



o o o o o 



oooooooo 



o o o o o 



oooooooo 



205 



o o o o 



o o o 



W O 

X C^ 

H < 

O W 



U Q 
M W 

< en 



O O r-l O O 



I 



o o o o o 



o o o o 



o o o o 



r^ r^ U3 o o 



o o o 



u 


W 


< 


^ 


H 




W 




Q 






(H 


Kl 




O 


U 


Q 


u 



u 




^ 




oi 


CO 


< 


J 


PQ 






(H 


W 




^ 


H 



206 



gg 



o o o o o o 



Q 






M 






H 






U 






;j 






< 






C/3 






C/D 






< 




§ ; 


Kfl 




ft 1 


^ 




^ : 


ti 




S 1 


u 




[1. < 


^ 




O 1 
M 1 


b 




ft I 


o 




H ' 


H 






Z 






u 






s 






N 






U 






Pi; 






o 






b 






Z 






U 




^ 




So 


< 




o 5 
< 






< m 






g^ 






H 



u w 

l-H U 
>H o 



o o o o o o 



o o o o o o 



o o o o o o 



^ 




J 


a 


w 


< 


M 






ffi 


s 


o 


w 


3 


H 




01 


Cd 


o 


w 


U 


u 


u 





207 



„ 



Cr\ iH rH o o t^ c^ 



o o o o 



o 






ti 






H 






^ 






O 






< 






C/3 






(/3 






< 




B ; 


C/3 




C14 1 


OS 




< 1 


u 




S ' 


u 




fc I 






1 


b 




W 1 


t^ 




a 1 







t: : 


H 






Z 






ti 






S 






U 






u 






X 













b 






Z 






ti 




^ 




M 

U Q 
1-1 W 


< 










< CO 






H < 



w o 

a: n 

H < 

O M 



o o [^ > o 



000000 r- o 00 



00000000 



00000000 rs o 00 



i 
II 



I 
I 



H 


CO 




< 




>H 


H 




ft; 


M 





D 




u 


CQ 


>H 




CO 


a 







^ 


u 


J 


ta 




< 


CO 




CO 








^ 


CJ 


cu 



208 



o 






u 






H 






^ 






^ 






< 






C/) 






c« 






< 




o i 


03 




04 1 


ea 




^ : 


u 




3 ; 


u 




fc, 1 






O 1 


b 




W 1 


b 




a* 1 


o 




H 1 


H 






Z 






ti 






S 






Ui 






u 






cjs: 






o 






b 






z 






u 




Di 


^ 




U Q 


< 




< 












o 






H 



u u 

J" o 



X a. 

Eh < 

o w 

3 



o rv) o o 











Q 




u 












O, 






en 










0^ 


0^ 


en 


►4 








U 


u 


< 


J 


< 








O 


K 


m 


< 










w 


W 




H 


o 




>i 




J 




2 


O 






H 




J 






H 






g 




o 


d 






M 






u 


u 




W 


U 




O 








Q 


U 






u 




m 


en 


a 


>-i 



209 



,f 



i-i u 

CO OS 
>^ O 



in fN! q- 



<1 

i 






210 



11 



o o o o 



ID o r- 



o r-i vr> vo 



o o o o 



o ov fH o o m m 



u w 
l-t (J 

>< O 



o w 
s 



w 

a Q 

M M 

J cn 

< w 

H < 
O 



o o o o 



o o o o 



o o o o 



o o o o 



o o o o 



O ■^ rr, 



o o o o o o o 



o o o o o o o 



^ O .H V£> 



Q 




Q 


o 


3 




a 




0. 


o 


g 




2 


Q 




2 


cn 




S 


D, 


g 




a 


J 


o 




E-i 




o 


H 


^ 


CQ 






0, 


W 


u 


W 


S 


^ 




a 


o 


X 




u 


w 


u 


H 


DC 




H 


o 




IH 


W 


a- 


< 


^ 


S 


s 


< 


w 


E- 



211 



o 






ti 






H 






J 






;^ 






< 






(/5 






(/3 






< 




O 1 


y) 




Cl< 1 


Pi 




^ : 


» 




3 1 


u 




Ci. 1 


tax 




O 1 


b 




U 1 


b 




Ch 1 


O 




H 1 


H 






Z 






U 






S 






U 






u 






ffi 






o 






b 






z 






b 




K 


^ 




M 

U Q 
M H 


2 




o 5 

< 












H < 






H 



U M 
n U 

>H O 



I! 



212 



O r-( rH 



CI 






ti 






H 






hJ 






U) 






< 












^ 






-< 




2 1 
O 1 


c« 






OJ 




^ ; 


ti 




S ' 


u 




fc I 






O 1 


b 




W 1 


b 




a. 1 


O 




H ' 


^ 






2:; 






u 






s 






u 






y 






p^ 






o 






b 






z. 




w 
Pi 


ti 




^ 




M M 






Ck Eh 
O 5 






< m 






S"^ 






H 



M U 

CO a 
>■ o 



213 



a g 



o 














< 

tj w 


J 








;3 

< 






>^ o 

a: ci. 
a 


c^ 








C/5 








< 




3 


m 






a; s 


C/3 




(1. 


w O 


0^ 




< 


^% 


ti 




s 


o w 


u 




[14 








o 




^ 




u 


u 


u< 




& 


b- 


O 






1 


H 








Z 








U 






1 

Cd 


S 






u 






u 






0^ 


Q^ 






u! 


O 






b 








Z 








u 






^ 




m 
u c 

M t 




< 

n4 




H 








►J c 









< c 









S' 


i: 






H 





[^ [^ O .H 



o o o o 



o o o o 



o o o o 





§ 


K 


u 


^ 


Q 






^ 


§ 






m 


b; 


(U 




w 




< 




o 


w 


o 


CQ 


u 


u 


u 


u 






►4 


> 


J 


W 


§ 


w 


K 


w 


►q 




Q 


Ci] 


B 


9 


H) 



214 



i 



w o 
X cu 
H < 
o w 
s 



< c/) 
H < 
O 



rH O Tf O O iH iH 



O O O O 



(N <N <N fN >-l 



rH O . -J- O O 



O O O O O O 



O O O O O O 



[^ O O O O O O 



m q< (N 



O O O CN O O 



O O O O O 



o o o o 



215 



< Q 

w 
w a 
u < 

►J J 
o u 



ooinoooooo 



^3 



o o o o o o 



Q 






U 






H 






^ 






P 






<• 






CZ5 






C/3 






< 




O ' 


CZ3 






01 




i ; 


U 




S ' 


u 




Pu 1 


MM 




O 1 






W 1 


o 




H 1 


H 






Z 






tij 






S 






ti 






u 






q:: 






o 






u. 






z 






UJ 






^ 




So 

M W 


^ 

u 
















H < 






H 



M U 

CO a 

>H O 



o o o o 



Oi-IOOOOOO 



0'5l>000000 



ooooooooo 



o o o o o o 



o o in o o o 



o 








H 


&. 




m 


u 




Q 


Q 


< 




« vo * 


a 






o; 




S 


u 






Q 


« 


< 


< 




H 


« « 


3 


1^ 






S 


a 


< 




w 


< 


« 


o 


o 


01 


H 


♦ 2 ♦ 


H 


s 




X 


K 


s 


W 


O 


< 



216 



LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

EMPLOYEE 

DATA 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 



POLICE EMPLOYEE DATA 

The Uniform Crime Reporting Program in Maryland incorporates the 
collection of pertinent data relating to the police of the State. 
Information regarding police employee strength is discussed in this 
section. 

This information is submitted by county, municipal and state law 
enforcement agencies and compiled on an annual basis. Specific 
information concerning the number of law enforcement employees 
reflects the status as of October 31, 2005 

LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE RATES 

In 2005, the average number of full-time law enforcement employees 
remained unchanged from 2004. Law enforcement employees, (state, 
county and municipal) including civilian employees, amounted to 3.5 
for each 1,000 inhabitants of the state. The rate based on sworn 
personnel only (excluding civilians), amounted to 2.7 per 1,000 
population. 

The ratio of law enforcement employees per 1,000 population in any 
given area or municipality is influenced by a number of factors, 
much the same as the crime rate. The determination of law 
enforcement strength for a given county or municipality is based on 
factors such as population density, size and character of the 
community, geographic location, proximity to metropolitan areas and 
other conditions which exist in the area generating the need for law 
enforcement services. Employee rates also differ among agencies 
since, in particular, there is a wide variation of the 
responsibilities and level of activity within various law 
enforcement agencies. The information in this section relates to 
reported police employee strength and should not be interpreted as 
recommended strength for any area. 

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES 

The personnel of each law enforcement agency differ as to the 
demands and responsibilities placed before them. Many police 
officers are fully occupied with clerical tasks and are not free to 
perform active police duties. Some police administrators use 
civilians in this capacity, thus freeing the sworn personnel for 
actual police related services. 

As of October 31, 2005, 4,813 or 24 percent of the total number of 
police employees in Maryland were civilians. 



218 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE RATES 

♦NUMBER SWORN **RATE 

REGION I 1,259 3.0 

1.8 
2.4 
2.7 
2.2 
2.6 
3.3 
4.3 
2.9 
4.6 

1.9 

1.5 
2.2 

1.7 

1.7 

2.0 
1.6 
1.7 
2.5 
1.6 

2.0 

1.6 
2.5 

3.1 

5.5 
2.0 
2.7 
1.7 
2.0 

STATEWIDE 799 



STATE TOTALS 14,932 2.7 



Caroline County 


57 


Cecil County 


234 


Dorchester County 


83 


Kent County 


44 


Queen Anne ' s County 


120 


Somerset County 


85 


Talbot County 


153 


Wicomico County 


256 


Worcester County 


227 


REGION II 


599 


Calvert County 


131 


Charles County 


305 


St. Mary's County 


163 


REGION III 


1, 083 


Allegany County 


149 


Carroll County 


265 


Frederick County 


370 


Garrett County 


75 


Washington County 


224 


REGION IV 


3, 621 


Montgomery County 


1,489 


Pr. George's County 


2, 132 


REGION V 


7,571 


Baltimore City 


3, 504 


Anne Arundel County 


1, 004 


Baltimore County 


2,121 


Harford County 


412 


Howard County 


530 



*Number sworn persons only 
**Rate per 1,000 population 



219 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 

NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER 
TOTAL SWORN CIVILIAN MALE FEMALE 

REGION I 1,529 1,259 270 1,246 283 

CAROLINE COUNTY 61 57 4 54 7 



Denton 


11 


10 


1 


8 


3 


Federalsburg 


9 


8 


1 


9 





Greensboro 


4 


4 





4 





Preston 


1 


1 





1 





Ridgely 


5 


5 





5 





Sheriff's Dept. 


28 


26 


2 


24 


4 


State Police 


3 


3 





3 





CECIL COUNTY 


279 


234 


45 


237 


42 


Elkton 


41 


31 


10 


30 


11 


North East 


8 


7 


1 


7 


1 


Perryville 


2 


1 


1 


1 


1 


Rising Sun 


7 


6 


1 


6 


1 


Sheriff's Dept. 


98 


87 


11 


88 


10 


State Police 


123 


102 


21 


105 


18 



DORCHESTER COUNTY 101 83 18 80 21 



Cambridge 
Hurlock 

Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 


58 
8 

31 
4 


46 
7 

27 
3 


12 
1 
4 
1 


46 
7 

24 
3 


12 
1 
7 

1 


KENT COUNTY 


47 


44 


3 


41 


6 


Chestertown 
Rock Hall 
Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 


14 
4 

23 
6 


13 
4 

21 
6 


1 

2 



11 
4 

20 
6 


3 

3 




QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY 14 7 12 2 7 12 8 19 



Centreville 


7 


6 


1 


5 


2 


Sheriff's Dept. 


47 


44 


3 


42 


5 


State Police 


93 


70 


23 


81 


12 



220 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 



NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER 
TOTAL SWORN CIVILIAN MALE FEMALE 



SOMERSET COUNTY 

Crisf ield 

Princess Anne 

UMES 

Sheriff ' s Dept . 

State Police 

TALBOT COUNTY 

Easton 

Oxford 

St. Michael's 

Sheriff's Dept. 

State Police 

WICOMICO COUNTY 

Delmar 
Fruitland 
Salisbury 
Salisbury State 
Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 

WORCESTER COUNTY 

Berlin 
Ocean City 
Ocean Pines 
Pocomoke City 
Snow Hill 
Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 

REGION II 

CALVERT COUNTY 

Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 



103 


85 


18 


84 


19 


15 


11 


4 


11 


4 


11 


10 


1 


9 


2 


11 


8 


3 


9 


2 


22 


19 


3 


18 


4 


44 


37 


7 


37 


7 


183 


153 


30 


142 


41 


63 


49 


14 


44 


19 


5 


5 





5 





8 


7 


1 


5 


3 


25 


23 


2 


21 


4 


82 


69 


13 


67 


15 


332 


256 


76 


262 


70 


10 


9 


1 


10 





15 


14 


1 


"13 


2 


109 


85 


24 


82 


27 


20 


16 


4 


14 


6 


95 


73 


22 


72 


23 


83. 


59 


24 


71 


12 


276 


227 


49 


218 


58 


19 


14 


. 5 


12 


7 


11-2 


97 


15 


89 


23 


20 


15 


5 


18 


2 


20 


14 


6 


14 


6 


8 


7 


1 


7 


1 


47 


40 


7 


37 


10 


50 


40 


10 


41 


9 


906 


599 


307 


661 


245 


154 


131 


23 


128 


26 


108 


93 


15 


91 


17 


46 


38 


8 


37 


9 



221 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 



NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER 
TOTAL SWORN CIVILIAN MALE FEMALE 



459 


305 


154 


320 


139 


10 


9 


1 


10 





396 


254 


142 


268 


128 


53 


42 


11 


42 


11 



CHARLES COUNTY 

LaPlata 

Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 



ST. MARY'S COUNTY 293 163 130 213 



St. Mary's College 
Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 


13 

225 

55 


1 

122 

40 


12 

103 

15 


11 

157 

45 


2 

68 
10 


REGION III 


1,570 


1,083 


487 


1,303 


267 


ALLEGANY COUNTY 


182 


149 


33 


164 


18 


Cumberland 
Frostburg 
Frostburg State 
Luke 

Westernport 
Sheriff's Dept. 
State Police 


53 
13 
18 
1 
2 
25 
70 


50 
9 

15 
1 
2 

23 

49 


3 
4 
3 


2 
21 


48 
10 
13 
1 
2 
25 
65 


5 
3 
5 



5 



CARROLL COUNTY 409 265 144 344 65 



Hampstead 


9 


7 


2 


7 


2 


Manchester 


5 


5 





4 


1 


Springfield Hosp . 


13 


4 


9 


10 


3 


Sykesville 


8 


7 


1 


7 


1 


Taneytown 


11 


10 


1 


10 


1 


Westminster 


58 


44 


14 


42 


16 


Sheriff's Dept. 


76 


59 


17 


59 


17 


State Police 


229 


129 


100 


205 


24 


EDERICK COUNTY 


481 


370 


111 


384 


97 


Brunswick 


13 


11 


2 


10 


3 


Frederick 


159 


124 


35 


126 


33 


Thurmont 


10 


9 


. 1 


8 


2 


Sheriff's Dept. 


210 


157 


53 


160 


50 


State Police 


89 


69 


20 


80 


9 



222 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 



GARRETT COUNTY 

Oakland 

Sheriff ' s Dept 
State Police 



TOTAL 


SWORN 


CIVILIAN 


r4ALE 


FEIVIALE 


112 


75 


37 


100 


12 


6 


5 


1 


5 


1 


49 


28 


21 


44 


5 


57 


42 


15 


51 


6 



WASHINGTON COUNTY 



386 



224 



162 



311 



75 



Boonsboro 


2 


2 





2 





Hagerstown 


116 


95 


21 


90 


26 


Hancock 


4 


3 


1 


3 


1 


Smithsburg 


3 


2 


1 


2 


1 


Sheriff's Dept. 


201 


77 


124 


163 


38 


State Police 


60 


45 


15 


51 


9 


REGION IV 


4, 643 


3, 621 


1, 022 


3,346 


1,297 


MONTGOMERY COUNTY 


2,009 


1,489 


520 


1,403 


606 


Chevy Chase 


17 


10 


7 


10 


7 


Gaithersburg 


44 


42 


2 


35 


9 


MD Nat. Cap. Park 


101 


84 


17 


68 


33 


• Montgomery 


1,496 


1, 091 


405 


1, 027 


469 


Rockville 


76 


50 


26 


60 


16 


Takoma Park 


53 


37 


16 


36 


17 


Sheriff's Dept. 


157 


128 


29 


108 


49 


State Police 


65 


47 


18 


59 


6 



PR. GEORGE'S COUNTY 



2, 634 



2, 132 



502 



1, 943 



691 



Berwyn Heights 


7 


6 


1 


6 


1 


Bladensburg 


24 


16 


8 


17 


7 


Bowie State Univ. 


29 


15 


14 


20 


9 


Capitol Heights 


7 


5 


2 


5 


2 


Cheverly 


15 


13 


2 


13 


2 


Cottage City 


6 


6 





6 





District Heights 


13 


10 


3 


10 


3 


Edmonston 


6 


5 


1 


6 





Fairmount Heights 


4 


4 





4 





Forest Heights 


4 


3 


1 


3 


1 


Glen Arden 


5 


4 


1 


4 


1 


Greenbelt 


68 


54 


14. 


49 


19 



223 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 

NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER 

TOTAL SWORN CIVILIAN MALE FEMALE 

PR. GEORGE'S COUNTY 
(CON'T) 

Hyattsville 37 27 10 23 14 

Landover Hills 5 4 14 1 

Laurel . 68 54 14 53 15 

MD Nat. Cap. Park 111 81 30 77 34 

Morningside 7 6 16 1 

Mt . Rainier 16 13 3 13 3 

Pr. George's 1,634 1,403 231 1,228 406 

Riverdale Park 22 16 6 17 5 

Seat Pleasant 17 15 2 13 4 

UMCP 103 74 29 78 25 

University Park 8 8 8 

Upper Marlboro 2 2 2 

Sheriff's Dept . 282 183 99 170 112 

State Police 134 105 29 108 26 



REGION V 9,843 7,571 2,272 7,261 2,582 

BALTIMORE CITY 4,348 3,504 844 3,154 1,194 



Baltimore City 


3,663 


3, 034 


629 


2,686 


977 


Coppin State 


15 


13 


2 


9 


6 


General Services 


96 


44 


52 


65 


31 


Morgan State Univ. 


39 


31 


8 


27 


12 


MD Transit Admin. 


163 


148 


15 


122 


41 


Univ. of Balto. 


42 


12 


30 


24 


18 


UMB 


145 


61 


84 


85 


60 


Sheriff's Dept. 


156 


134 


22 


111 


45 


State Police 


29 


27 


2 


25 


4 



ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY 1,369 1,004 365 999 370 



Annapolis 


166 


119 


47 


114 


52 


Anne Arundel 


876 


657 


219 


648 


228 


General Services 


80 


44 


36 


60 


20 


Sheriff's Dept. 


91 


64 


27 


56 


35 


State Police 


156 


120 


36 


121 


35 



224 



LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE DATA 



NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER 
TOTAL SWORN CIVILIAN MALE FEMALE 



LTIMORE COUNTY 


2,827 


2, 121 


706 


2,158 


669 


Baltimore Co. 


2,154 


1, 816 


338 


1,696 


458 


Towson University 


55 


36 


19 


42 


13 


Rosewood 


12 


5 


7 


5 


7 


UMBO 


36 


26 


10 


28 


8 


Sheriff's Dept . 


87 


70 


17 


70 


17 


State Police 


483 


168 


315 


317 


166 



HARFORD COUNTY 512 412- 100 416 96 



Aberdeen 


48 


39 


9 


37 


11 


Bel Air 


41 


29 


12 


32 


9 


Havre de Grace 


38 


29 


9 


31 


7 


Sheriff's Dept. 


• 307 


254 


53 


250 


57 


State Police 


78 


61 


17 


66 


12 



HOWARD COUNTY 787 . 530 257 534 253 



Howard 


513 


368 


145 


349 


164 


Sheriff's Dept. 


64 


37 


27 


45 


19 


State Police 


210 


125 


85 


140 


70 



STATEWIDE AGENCIES 1,254 799 455 922 332 

Comp. of Treasury 88 

MD Trans. Authority 567 

Natural Resources 504 

State Fire Marshal 73 

DPS&CS-IIU 22 



MARYLAND'S TOTAL 19,745 



26 


62 




48 


40 


429 


138 




434 


133 


285 


219 




365 


139 


41 


32 




60 


13 


18 


4 




15 


7 


932 


4,813 


14 


,739 


5,006 



225 



CRIME INDEX FOR MARYLAND 



10 YEAR TREND 





AVERAGE 


200S 


2 00'1 


2 00 3 


2 00 2 


2001 


2000 


199S^ 


1 'J 'J H 


; 'j ') 7 


;v.c 


OFFENSES 


bl/ 


bbZ 


521 


52 5 


^ 


4 6! 


438 


4 92 


511 


501 


586 


*RATE 


9.6 


9.9 


9.4 


9.5 


9.7 


8.6 


8.3 


9.5 


10.0 


9.8 


11.6 


PERCENT CLEARED 


60 


60 


54 


5 5 


'.'. 






C2 


68 


63 


61 


NATIONAL AVERAGE 


65 


.. 


6 3 


r,j. 


r,-i 






C. 


6& 


66 


67 












RAPE 














OFFENSES 


1,517 


1,266 


1,316 


1,358 


1,364 


1,453 


1,508 


1,482 


1,707 


1,813 


1, 507 


•RATE 


28.7 


22.6 


23.7 


24.7 


25.0 


27.0 


28.5 


28.7 


33.2 


35.6 


37.6 


PERCENT CLEARED 


56 


55 


55 


52 


56 


55 


55 


56 


60 


= c. 


58 


NATIONAL AVERAGE 


■17 


*♦ 


4L' 


■M 


•1 


■-.■! 


-;7 


■\'j 






52 












ROBBERY 














OFFENSES 


14,861 


14, 378 


12,761 


13,302 


13,687 


14,252 


13,707 


14, 124 


15,303 


17,158 


19,935 


*RATE 


280.3 


256.7 


229.6 


241.5 


250.8 


265.1 


258.8 


273.1 


298.0 


336.8 


393.0 


PERCENT CLEARED 


25 


26 


26 


26 


27 


25 


25 


24 


24 


26 


24 


NATIONAL AVERAGE 


26 


** 


26 


26 


25 


25 


26 


29 


2 8 


26 


^ = 










AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 












OFFENSES 


24,854 


23, 173 


24, 339 


23,593 


26,709 


26,748 


26,201 


26,105 


23,260 


23,614 


24,798 


*RATE 


467.2 


413.8 


437.9 


428.3 


489.3 


497.6 


494.7 


504.7 


453.0 


463.6 


488.9 


PERCENT CLEARED 


62 


64 


62 


65 


63 


63 


63 


54 


62 


62 


61 


NATIONAL AVERAGE 


51.7 


** 


56 


56 


57 


56 


57 


59 


59 


59 


58 












BURGLARY 














OFFENSES 


43,244 


35, 921 


36,682 


38,641 


39,721 


42,799 


39,654 


43,629 


57,235 


47,839 


50,316 


*RATE 


797.0 


641.4 


660.0 


701.4 


727.7 


796.2 


748.7 


843.6 


919.9 


939.1 


992.0 


PERCENT CLEARED 


17 


17 


17 


17 


17 


15 


17 


16 


17 


19 


16 


NATIONAL AVERAGE 


13 


*' 


13 


13 


13 


13 


13 


14 


14 


1-; 


14 










LARCENY -THEFT 













OFFENSES 148,025 128,483 129,786 134,369 144,074 147,594 146,156 150,020 158,431 166,054 175,283 

*RATE 2,791.5 2,294.2 2,335.1 2,439.1 2,639.6 2,745.9 2,759.5 2,900.6 3,085.3 3,259.8 3,455.9 

PERCENT CLEARED 19 20 20 19 19 17 18 19 20 20 20 

NATIONAL AVERAGE 19 ** 18 18 18 18 18 19 19 2C 20 

MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 

OFFENSES 32,306 34,070 35,858 36,406 35,882 33,289 26,622 26,067 28,140 30,646 36,076 

*RATE 609.7 608.4 645.2 660.9 657.4 619.3 540.4 504.0 548.0 601.6 711.3 

PERCENT CLEARED 13 11 9 10 13 13 14 15 13 14 14 

NATIONAL AVERAGE 14 ** 13 13 14 14 14 15 14 14 14 

GRAND TOTAL 

OFFENSES 264,518 237,843 241,263 248,194 261,965 266,598 256,286 261,919 274,587 287,625 306,903 

*RATE PER 4,983.9 4,246.9 4,340.8 4,505.3 4,799.5 4,959.8 4,838.8 5,064.2 5,347.4 5.646.3 6,090.4 

PERCENT CLEARED 23 23 22 22 23 22 23 22 23 23 22 

NATIONAL AVERAGE 21 ** 20 21 20 '20 21 II 21 22 22 

* Rate per 100,000 population 

**2005 National Clearance rate was not available prior to printing of this publication. 



227 



no ^«OT CiRCULATE 





ro 


M 


^ 


o 


M 


^ 




> 


to 


^ 


M 


^ 


po 




f 


o 


Ix) 


:^ 


O 


o 




H 


H' 


k: 


H^ 


1— 1 


s 




M 






^ 


u 


. . 




s 


^ 


^ 


M 






o 


M 


^ 


t" 


^ 






^ 


M 


a 




h-9 






M 


w 




^ 










^ 


en 


M 


^ 






s 


w 


H 


n 


m 






a 


:?o 


> 


o 


^ 








w 


H 


^ 


o 






M 


^ 


M 


D 


pa 






M 


o 




w 


H^ 






tsj 


s: 


^ 




M 






o 


S3 


O 


a 


^ 






00 


?« 


M 


< 


o 




•^ 


(jj 


o 


n 


en 


en 




o 


00 


> 


m 


M 


M 








a 




s 


M 
O 

s; 





o 
o